PDA

View Full Version : Is it rape if the woman is drunk?



aruna
11-24-2006, 11:36 AM
First, read the article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/04/nrape04.xml

aruna
11-24-2006, 11:53 AM
How do you feel about women who deliberately drink themselves into semi-oblivion, have sex, and then claim it was rape? If you are drunk you don't know what you are doing, true; but aren't you reponsible for getting drunk in the first place?

This is a huge problem in Britain, and as mother of a teenage girl it shocks and scares me. Though my daughter is very mature, doesn't drink, and is totally sickened, as I am, by the sight of drunkenness, I can't help wndering if peer pressure will ever make her crack.

Binge drinking here in Britian has reached epidemic proportions - expecially for young women. I've not only read about it and see it in TV - if you go out on a Friday or Saturday night or even in the daytime, you can see them - young girls totally out of control; they go out with the deliberate intention of getting wasted.

In this country, alcohold consumption of 14 year old girls outstrips boys. It's just the cool thing to do, espcecially during the first week of University, so its not just a class/education thing. This is a culture that glorifies drinking in general, and it's perfectly cool to boast of how drunk you were and what you did when you were drunk.

So if a woman says "yes" when she is drunk, can it be called rape because when you're drunk you don't know what you're doing? (I know this isn't the case in the original article.) What if the man is drunk as well?

Tiger
11-24-2006, 12:58 PM
I think there are precedents on college campuses in the U.S. (i.e.: Brown University) that say yes, it is rape. Morally, I'd say there is a definite double standard when alcohol is involved.

What if the guy's drunk too? Is his impaired judgement taken into account?

lauram
11-24-2006, 01:06 PM
I think in this case I'd call it rape. He knew he shouldn't be doing it, and he was a jerk about it (writing things on her body afterwards).

If they were a couple and they had consensual sex before this incident, I'd say that it wasn't rape.

It is a fine line, and both sexes should be cautious when drinking in social settings.

Elodie-Caroline
11-24-2006, 02:19 PM
I think his sentence "How do you classify rape?" just shows his complete arrogance about the situation. With that kind of attitude, even him seeing some girl he's seen at university passing by him in the street is justification for having sex with her when she's drunk.

If he was in a role of looking after new students and the girl was drunk, no matter how he sees it, he took advantage of the situation; he wouldn't have been asked to escort her home if he hadn't of had that duty bestowed upon him.

The girl was stupid for getting drunk in the first place; but he had a responsibility to get her home, safely.

Ellie

oswann
11-24-2006, 02:50 PM
He is the sort of typical, snotty twit who is astounded he is being tried at all, and should be punished. Yes, he should go down for rape. Yes, it is rape. If he is taking advantage sexually because the girl was drunk and couldn't defend herself or because he was holding her down and couldn't defend herself, for me is the same thing. I'd give him ten years.


Os.

Inkdaub
11-24-2006, 03:03 PM
I think the guy is a ******* but not a rapist. He's only making himself out to be more of an ******* by playing the victim card.

I don't know. I don't understand why people do half the things they do.

aruna
11-24-2006, 03:12 PM
I think in this case I'd call it rape. He knew he shouldn't be doing it, and he was a jerk about it (writing things on her body afterwards).

If they were a couple and they had consensual sex before this incident, I'd say that it wasn't rape.

It is a fine line, and both sexes should be cautious when drinking in social settings.

Actually, I think the "writing things on her body" is more in his favour... it sounds more like a twatty, jokey thing they did together than mean-spirited; which would mean she was, in her drunken state, consenting.

There's no question he took advantage of the situation, and abused his position of responsibility. And whining about it afterwards. But "rape" is taking it a step too far IMO.

astonwest
11-24-2006, 04:47 PM
In the US, even outside of the college system, being drunk means you can't consent to sex (just like you can't sign a legal contract under the influence).

My favorite quote, from the defendant:
"This is surely a contravention of my human rights. Myself and my family have suffered greatly during this ordeal and it will take time to rebuild our lives."

Kudra
11-24-2006, 04:50 PM
Was there consent? If yes, no matter how much of a jerk the guy is, it wasn't rape.

kikazaru
11-24-2006, 05:22 PM
He was in a position of authority. He even signed a contract agreeing to no sex between him and the new students. Obviously there was a concern about these types of situations or else there wouldn't be a contract to begin with. He took clearly took advantage of the situation and of the girl's condition. You'd think with ears that big, he could hear his conscience telling him it was a bad idea. I don't feel sorry for him one bit.

britwrit
11-24-2006, 05:39 PM
Come on, climbing on top of a woman who passes out when you're undressing her is rape, pure and simple. The fact that he wrote his phone number and "cute" little message on her stomach pretty much removes all doubt in my mind.

Ok, as an American living in London, I realize a lot of relationships begin here with the drunken hook-up. Still, this is still way beyond the norm.

Provrb1810meggy
11-24-2006, 06:13 PM
I think this would still be classified as rape. Maybe not if he was just another fresher and they went home together, but he was an older student, taking freshman student home for their safety, and he signed a contract saying, "No sex." Even if it isn't considered rape, I still consider this disgusting behavior and I think this kid should stop whining. The girl is the victim, not him!

SC Harrison
11-24-2006, 07:13 PM
Yeah, it's rape.

He took advantage of his position of responsibility and subjected her to exactly the kind of treatment he was supposed to protect her from.

And writing, "I pulled the President" on her belly tells me a couple of things: she was probably incoherent and he knew she wouldn't be aware he was writing it, plus, he knew she was so drunk she wouldn't remember who he was, so he wanted to leave her a message. It's not cute, it's the act of a successful predator.

Apparently the act didn't meet the criteria for a conviction as a "crime", and that's okay. But it did deserve to be investigated and brought to court, so it could smear that smarmy little bastard's reputation.

aghast
11-24-2006, 07:31 PM
its not rape unless the woman clearly said no but she was so drunk she probably doesnt remember and we all know drinking lessen your inhibition and not increase it so chances are she did have sex with him 'willingly' under the influence of alcohol and she did it herself, no one forced her to drink so id agree the guy might be a jerk to take advantage of her but she cant really claim rape - otherwise there will be a lot of people using that excuse to get out of anything - i was drunk, so it doesnt count - i woke up with a hangover and found that he was so ugly so he must have raped me - oh please

Haggis
11-24-2006, 07:34 PM
Not enough information to tell.

The last thing she remembers is him taking off her underwear. Did she object to that? If she did, it's rape. If she consented, then it's not. If she was too drunk to do either, it's still unclear. There's simply not enough information to make a judgement, except for the fact that every breath that guy takes is a complete waste of oxygen.

aghast
11-24-2006, 07:35 PM
In the US, even outside of the college system, being drunk means you can't consent to sex (just like you can't sign a legal contract under the influence)...

thats news to me because i see drunk people hooking up all the time and i have had sex a few times while intoxicated and woke up thinking gosh what have i done, and gosh how many 'rape' cases are we going to have now - is there really a law out there saying if youre under the influence you cant have sex - because theres no way you can consent? first i heard... and if both are intoxicated it comes a he said she said

scarletpeaches
11-24-2006, 07:40 PM
Was there consent? If yes, no matter how much of a jerk the guy is, it wasn't rape.

I strongly disagree. If a woman's drunk enough to not be in her right mind, she's incapable of giving informed consent. If a man takes advantage of her drunken state, at worst he's a rapist and at best he's certainly not a gentleman.

Haggis
11-24-2006, 07:47 PM
I strongly disagree. If a woman's drunk enough to not be in her right mind, she's incapable of giving informed consent. If a man takes advantage of her drunken state, at worst he's a rapist and at best he's certainly not a gentleman.

But what if a drunken woman is the aggressor (it happens). Who is the rapist then? Is it still the man?

The Lady
11-24-2006, 08:04 PM
I wouldn't touch any man who ever had sex with a woman who was so drunk, she couldn't remember what was going on.

Hello people. Look around a bar sometime. People who are that drunk are not attractive. They drool. Their eyes are glazed. They talk like they have brain damage. While I sometimes admire the state they've got them selves into, they're not love material at that point.

It's a first cousin of necrophilia. Whether he got away with it or not, bottom line is he's scum and that's what he always will be. On the other hand, being daft and drinking too much is a temporary state which people often pass through and out of. Predators like him should be told, shagging the drunk stranger is a complete no no. I mean if that's the case, we can all go aroung robbing drunk people and claiming afterwards they gave us their money.

In my lifetime I've met two men on the street who were so drunk they could not mind themselves. I called an ambulance for one. The other did not require an ambulance but he was incapable of minding himself and the night was cold. I callled the guards to come get him. Notice, I raped neither of them.

James D. Macdonald
11-24-2006, 08:07 PM
Q. Is it rape if the woman is drunk?

A. Yes.

Next question?

veinglory
11-24-2006, 08:23 PM
Sex without consent is rape, and no the drunk woman did not 'ask' for it. Making yourself vulnerable does not lessen the guilt to any extent of a person who commits rape.

nicegrrl
11-24-2006, 08:24 PM
It is against the law in many states to have sex with someone intoxicated over the legal limit. There is no plaintiff if both parties are drunk.

I think its only rape if she is passed out. You can say it is not fair to have sex with someone who is so drunk they are beyond the point of informed consent, but its quite possible that the man is drunk beyond the point of being able to recognize what is and isnt informed consent. I mean, if she is passed out, then no matter how drunk he is, he should know better. But if she is so drunk she is stumbling around and incoherent and he is so drunk he is stumbling artound and incoherent, how is he supposed to know consent any better than she does? So, I agree with the law. If one party is drunk, it is a form of sexual assault (although not as aggregious as a rape against explicit non-consent). If both parties are drunk and both consent, it is not rape. If one party is incapable of consent due to being passed out, it is rape.

Scarlett_156
11-24-2006, 08:47 PM
I've posted elsewhere on this forum about this issue-- which is one that comes up again and again (and again, ad nauseum) in "males-only" types of settings. It's another of those things that makes me damned glad I don't have any kids. Here are my remarks:

There are a lot of things that look a lot like rape and yet are not; conversely, there are a lot of things that DON'T look like rape and yet are. That's life, especially in the Big City.
Taking advantage of a drunk girl is something generally acknowledged by all guys as shabby behavior. To some guys, shabby behavior is something only indulged in on rare occasions. To others, it's an elixir. No guy, however, goes through his whole life without acting shabby at least once or twice. (Most of them do it in military service, where their families and reputations are less likely to be affected by it.)
A girlfriend of mine and I once had sex with the same guy on two separate occasions, under nearly identical circumstances: We were at a party, we became extremely drunk, we went into another room of the house and crashed. This guy (he was a friend of both of ours, too, not just some random guy) came in and when we woke up, he was screwing us. In my case, since I knew him and had already Done him a time or two anyway (one time in a kiddy park, yeeks! we were running around naked and screaming, to this day I can't imagine why no one called the police) I participated in this act, which was quickly over; then we went to sleep. In my girlfriend's case-- well one day we were talking and this guy's name came up. He was in a band and his band had just moved to another state to take advantage of gig opportunities there. My friend shuddered and said, "He raped me once!" I was like, "Oh...?" and it made me angry at him to hear that. Then when she told me the story, I realized that it was exactly what had happened to me, except that she chose to see it as a "rape". That made me go around wondering for a couple of years whether I also had been raped, and whether he had seen it as rape, and so on. My ultimate conclusion involved the realization that my friend had screwed hundreds of guys; she was what most people would term a "nymphomaniac". Even though I'm quite a bit older at this point, the total number of guys I've screwed, drunk or sober, is nowhere near 30. (If I ever hit 50, I will throw some kind of a party... hm.. or maybe that's what the party will be for: "I want to make 50 before I die! Bring a condom!") Anyway, let me add that another mutual male friend of ours recently told me of a harrowing few months of his life in which this same lady was aggressively pursuing him, calling him at all hours of the night, stopping by his place drunk and expecting for him to let her sleep there, and so on. (He managed to refuse her, though I'm not sure how he managed. Prayer, perhaps.) Therefore: My friend treated both of us shabbily, perhaps, but he didn't rape either one of us. Her saying that he had raped her was a value judgment against him, not a truly objective quantification of the facts.
I have several real-life friends and several more on-line friends that have committed sexual assaults/rapes against other people, in a few cases garnering the usual collection of felony convictions and legal hassles, and in other cases getting clean away with it time and time again. I don't like sexual offenders or encourage people to commit these acts-- I just seem to run into a lot of this type of person, as I do their victims, and I don't really know why except to speculate that perhaps there are more rapists and rape victims out there than the average person supposes...? In any case the rapist/victim always seems more than eager to spill his or her guts about whatever happened in lurid detail, sometimes to my great discomfort. Yea, I know that a lot of the time people lie about this type of thing, but court documents and newspaper articles generally do not lie. (If they do, then God help us all, I suppose.)Anyway, what I have grown to believe given all the above factors is this: People are stupid. Whether you are male or female, if you stick your hand in the shark's tank enough times, eventually the shark will bite you. The shark can't help being what it is-- it can't change its nature. You on the other hand can see its teeth and make an informed decision to keep your damned hand out of there.

Yes-- if you are just walking down the street and some guy jumps out of an alleyway, hits you over the head, and forces sex on you, then you are in no way to blame and it's a terrible crime; if you are lying in bed asleep in your apartment, and some guy climbs in the window and forces sex on you-- even if you left your window open, it's a terrible crime and you are in no way to blame.

If you are out in public getting wildly drunk and teasing everyone in sight, macking with complete strangers, flashing body parts at people, and begging for rides on the street corner, and some guy comes along and takes advantage of you-- he's a cad. Perhaps charges should be filed if he damages your body or steals your property. But it's not as clear-cut. To call it "rape" is a fine distinction that is perhaps not worth arguing over. When the guys start arguing about this type of thing, this girl puts her headphones on and turns up the volume.

If I had kids-- well, first off I can't even imagine it. Going through pregnancy and childbirth seem horrifying to me, and I'm someone who's seen my own patella hanging out after I crashed my bike once. If I had actually gone through the experience of having a child, I would want to make that experience count for something by not dropping the child into the sharks' tank before the child is old enough to know that the sharks will bite.

I would never leave an infant with someone I didn't completely know and trust, and I probably wouldn't leave it anywhere, period. I would personally escort the child to and from its school every day, or have it be escorted by another adult whom I trusted. I would supervise its play time with other children, and only allow it to go to homes of people I knew personally and had visited with myself. I would take the child with me to the library and store and never allow it to go by itself. If the child was involved in extracurricular activities such as sports I would unfailingly arrive before the activity was over to pick the child up, and let the child know in no uncertain terms that if I ever arrived to pick him up and found that he was somewhere other than where I expected him to be, he would never be allowed to participate in that activity again.

I would only allow my child to use a computer not connected to the internet-- if he needed to do research on something I would mandate that he submit that request to me so that I could look it up myself. If I found that he was using another person's internet service, or if he had rigged internet service on his own by stealing wireless or whatever (like one friend of mine, now age 16, has done several times), I would ground him for a very long period of time and not let him touch a computer at all. (I've told this one friend that he should be very glad I'm not his mom; his reply was: "If you WERE my mom, we'd BOTH be in jail right now!")

The above measures probably seem extreme to many, and kinda mean. But what seems extreme to me is the number of boys and girls who have told me that they have been raped or taken advantage of by opportunists.

Parents today seem to be overly preoccupied with their own careers and relationships, and I think that's a large part of the problem.

jchines
11-24-2006, 11:03 PM
In the U.S., rape laws vary from state to state. In some states, my own included, "rape" is a legally meaningless term. And I'm not familiar with the U.K. laws, or any evidence that might not have made it into the article.

With that disclaimer, Hagan was asked to escort this girl home because she was apparently too drunk to get there on her own. How could anyone possibly think she's in a state where she's capable of consenting to anything? As Hagan was the one who was sent to help her, I'm assuming he was not in such a state. He made the choice to have sex with a girl who couldn't consent. A girl who, from the sound of it, blacked out in the middle of this. Hagan chose to keep going.

Yes, getting that drunk in a party setting is unwise for anyone, and it has consequences. Consequences like puking your guts out, or a killer hangover the next day.

Getting raped is not a consequence of drinking. It's a consequence of someone choosing to rape. Are rapists more likely to look for drunk or otherwise helpless victims? Absolutely. But that doesn't take away from the rapists choice to commit the crime.

WriterInChains
11-24-2006, 11:35 PM
When I read the OP I wanted to add my $0.02. Luckily I read the whole thread first; veinglory, jchines, and Uncle Jim have already said what I would have, and they said it better. Thanks.

SC Harrison
11-24-2006, 11:49 PM
My ultimate conclusion involved the realization that my friend had screwed hundreds of guys; she was what most people would term a "nymphomaniac".

But that doesn't mean she's waived her right to choose when and where she has sex, and it doesn't excuse the behavior of a guy who engages in sex with an unconscious girl (even one he's had consensual sex with before).

And yes, if you drink and carry on in a way that leads others to believe you want to have sex, someone is eventually going to make a move, but that final decision is still up to you. When someone assumes your consent is no longer necessary, you have become a slave in the mind of that person.

aruna
11-25-2006, 12:26 AM
If the man is sober, it is most deinfitely rape. The grey area begins when both are drunk.
But of, why oh why do they behave this way - getting plastered, I mean. It is endemic over here among young women, and it's horrible.

robeiae
11-25-2006, 12:41 AM
But of, why oh why do they behave this way - getting plastered, I mean. It is endemic over here among young women, and it's horrible.It's become a rite of passage of sorts that lends itself to frequent repetition. I would humbly suggest that it's not so much endemic as it is merely more obvious, for reasons of demographics, first and foremost.

The Lady
11-25-2006, 12:43 AM
[quote=Scarlett_156]A girlfriend of mine and I once had sex with the same guy on two separate occasions, under nearly identical circumstances: We were at a party, we became extremely drunk, we went into another room of the house and crashed. This guy (he was a friend of both of ours, too, not just some random guy) came in and when we woke up, he was screwing us.

How oh how oh how is this not rape?

In my case, since I knew him and had already Done him a time or two anyway (one time in a kiddy park, yeeks! we were running around naked and screaming, to this day I can't imagine why no one called the police) I participated in this act, which was quickly over; then we went to sleep. In my girlfriend's case-- well one day we were talking and this guy's name came up. He was in a band and his band had just moved to another state to take advantage of gig opportunities there. My friend shuddered and said, "He raped me once!" I was like, "Oh...?" and it made me angry at him to hear that. Then when she told me the story, I realized that it was exactly what had happened to me, except that she chose to see it as a "rape".

Because it was rape.

That made me go around wondering for a couple of years whether I also had been raped, and whether he had seen it as rape, and so on. My ultimate conclusion involved the realization that my friend had screwed hundreds of guys; she was what most people would term a "nymphomaniac".

You just exonerated all men for behaving shabbily, in a rape thread. I'm assuming you mean by that, a little bit of raping is ok on military duty, long as your family or your reputation isn't tarnished. Your friend (by the way, that's not friendship) I'm assuming just slept around, not even raping those men and she'd the one you call names. God it makes me mad when women turn on each other like this.

Even though I'm quite a bit older at this point, the total number of guys I've screwed, drunk or sober, is nowhere near 30.

So what is your point? The lady with the lesat amount of partners gets the high moral ground from where she decide if it's rape or not.

(If I ever hit 50, I will throw some kind of a party... hm.. or maybe that's what the party will be for: "I want to make 50 before I die! Bring a condom!") Anyway, let me add that another mutual male friend of ours recently told me of a harrowing few months of his life in which this same lady was aggressively pursuing him, calling him at all hours of the night, stopping by his place drunk and expecting for him to let her sleep there, and so on. (He managed to refuse her, though I'm not sure how he managed. Prayer, perhaps.)

Are you sure this woman is your friend? She sounds like someone you absolutely despise.

Therefore: My friend treated both of us shabbily, perhaps, but he didn't rape either one of us. Her saying that he had raped her was a value judgment against him, not a truly objective quantification of the facts.

And that makes no sense. You go to sleep. You wake up and someone is raping you and somehow it's not rape because you shagged him before in your case, and in her case she shagged other men before. Rape is rape.

Anyway, what I have grown to believe given all the above factors is this: People are stupid. Whether you are male or female, if you stick your hand in the shark's tank enough times, eventually the shark will bite you. The shark can't help being what it is-- it can't change its nature. You on the other hand can see its teeth and make an informed decision to keep your damned hand out of there.

Except in this case, the whole world is full of men and we have to sleep sometime. How does the analogy hold up?


I have no idea what the children stuff is about. What about when they're grown up. Are you going to tell the young girls that sleeping around means thay have no rights over their bodies and being drunk is verboten for decent women.





quote]

aruna
11-25-2006, 12:43 AM
It's become a rite of passage of sorts that lends itself to frequent repetition. I would humbly suggest that it's not so much endemic as it is merely more obvious, for reasons of demographics, first and foremost.

Could you repeat that, in English for Dummies?

Sean D. Schaffer
11-25-2006, 12:48 AM
How do you feel about women who deliberately drink themselves into semi-oblivion, have sex, and then claim it was rape? If you are drunk you don't know what you are doing, true; but aren't you reponsible for getting drunk in the first place?

This is a huge problem in Britain, and as mother of a teenage girl it shocks and scares me. Though my daughter is very mature, doesn't drink, and is totally sickened, as I am, by the sight of drunkenness, I can't help wndering if peer pressure will ever make her crack.

Binge drinking here in Britian has reached epidemic proportions - expecially for young women. I've not only read about it and see it in TV - if you go out on a Friday or Saturday night or even in the daytime, you can see them - young girls totally out of control; they go out with the deliberate intention of getting wasted.

In this country, alcohold consumption of 14 year old girls outstrips boys. It's just the cool thing to do, espcecially during the first week of University, so its not just a class/education thing. This is a culture that glorifies drinking in general, and it's perfectly cool to boast of how drunk you were and what you did when you were drunk.

So if a woman says "yes" when she is drunk, can it be called rape because when you're drunk you don't know what you're doing? (I know this isn't the case in the original article.) What if the man is drunk as well?


I hate to be a judgmental @ss, but after having read the article, I would still say that the man should be held accountable for his actions. My personal viewpoint is that, if he could not control himself, then he is guilty of raping her whether or not she intended to get drunk, because he took advantage of a chance to easily get some sex.

Now, I don't know U.K. law--Heck, I don't even know U.S. law half the time, and I live in the U.S.--but my own personal opinion is that the young man should have had the wherewithal to refuse to do what his urges told him to do. I am saddened by the fact he considers his actions to be excusible, just because the woman involved was drunk. I would think that if he were an honorable man, he would have done the honorable thing and not pushed the situation into a sexual one.

robeiae
11-25-2006, 12:52 AM
Could you repeat that, in English for Dummies?Young adults get plastered because they thinks it proves how adult they are, since everyone got plastered when they were younger.

It's not really a growing problem; there are just more people, so more young adults get plastered and there are more people to notice that they are doing so.

Problems/incidents that arise from this behavior, like the one in your story, have a better chance to come out, since there are (dy defintion) more of such incidents.

:)

scarletpeaches
11-25-2006, 12:56 AM
But what if a drunken woman is the aggressor (it happens). Who is the rapist then? Is it still the man?

That's my point precisely.

If a woman's drunk and the man is the aggressor, he's a rapist.

If a woman's drunk and the woman is the aggressor and the man takes advantage of this, he is certainly no gentleman.

aruna
11-25-2006, 01:05 AM
Problems/incidents that arise from this behavior, like the one in your story, have a better chance to come out, since there are (dy defintion) more of such incidents.Oh. But you see, you;re in America with your strict drinking laws. You can;t imagne what it;s like here, and it is definitely on the rise - especially among young females. Binge-drinking is becoming sucha problem hardly a week goes by wthout some outcry or the other in th emedia, by Government or by doctors. Here are a couple of article about it:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4735205.stm

http://www.time.com/time/europe/html/051219/story.html

yes, we used to drink and get drunk when I was a teen but we never got drunk just for the sake of getting drunk, as is now the done thing.

I actually think it's one of the worst health problems in Britian today - if not THE worst.

aruna
11-25-2006, 01:07 AM
I'm saying it's not just a rite of passage anymore - not in the UK. It's almost a disease.

English Dave
11-25-2006, 01:26 AM
That's my point precisely.

If a woman's drunk and the man is the aggressor, he's a rapist.

If a woman's drunk and the woman is the aggressor and the man takes advantage of this, he is certainly no gentleman.

Many......many years ago I was in that position. This was a woman who I really fancied and had done for some time. I didn't take advantage. I didn't get another chance.

I still wake up sometimes chewing my pillow. What a Klutz!!!!

jchines
11-25-2006, 01:30 AM
My personal viewpoint is that, if he could not control himself, then he is guilty of raping her whether or not she intended to get drunk...

I know I'm nitpicking here, but I think it's important to remember that he could control himself. He made a choice. The idea that he had no control over himself reduces accountability for his actions.

robeiae
11-25-2006, 01:38 AM
I'm saying it's not just a rite of passage anymore - not in the UK. It's almost a disease.I think it starts as a rite of passage, and becomes a sort of "thing to do." The source remains the same. As to why it's more widespread and/or on the rise in the UK and the rest of Europe, I don't know that such is really the case; but if it is, I certainly have some opinions on the "why"...

SC Harrison
11-25-2006, 01:38 AM
I'm saying it's not just a rite of passage anymore - not in the UK. It's almost a disease.

The BBC article cites that adult cases have risen 15% while teen's have risen 11%, leading me to believe that the teens are merely following the examples of their elders, not leading the charge.

This also may represent a higher rate of depression amongst the general populace, due to economic factors like job security concerns and/or cost of living constraints.

Sean D. Schaffer
11-25-2006, 01:40 AM
I know I'm nitpicking here, but I think it's important to remember that he could control himself. He made a choice. The idea that he had no control over himself reduces accountability for his actions.


I understand what you're saying. I guess I should have clarified what I posted.

When I said "if he could not control himself", I was using a saying that a lot of people where I live use. The idea behind this saying is basically "He did what his instincts wanted instead of what he should have done".

So what I was trying to say, basically, is that he should be held accountable for his actions. Just because the woman was drunk, did not give him an excuse, IMO, to go ahead and take advantage of the situation.

I sometimes use slang in discussions like this by sheer nature. I apologize if my statement was not clear.

Tiger
11-25-2006, 01:58 AM
If a woman gets drunk and "consents" to have sex (come on, people; it happens) and we call her a rape victim, would that same woman be the victim of a robbery if she opened her wallet and gave away all of her cash? Legally, I mean.

scarletpeaches
11-25-2006, 02:02 AM
Well hey, let's just say it's okay for a man to take advantage of a woman who's so drunk she's not in her right mind.

If that's the only way they can get some...

scarletpeaches
11-25-2006, 02:03 AM
Many......many years ago I was in that position. This was a woman who I really fancied and had done for some time. I didn't take advantage. I didn't get another chance.

I still wake up sometimes chewing my pillow. What a Klutz!!!!

So you wish you had sex with a woman who was so drunk she couldn't put up a fight or consent?

tiny
11-25-2006, 02:06 AM
I don't want to comment on whether it's rape or not, but I do know that a lot of women use being drunk as an excuse to do things that they feel are not terribly moral. They fear people will think badly of them if they take a guy home for a one nighter. If they're drunk, they can say well, I was so drunk I didn't know what I was doing so it's just not my fault.

We should be allowed to walk around buck naked and so drunk we're blind and not have to worry. But, in this world, we can't. We're all responsible for our actions, and though I would never ever say that it's the woman's fault because she placed herself in danger, have some smarts when you go out. Keep an eye on your drink, don't drink to excess, always travel in a pack, and if you want to have a freaking one night stand be careful who you choose and be sober so you can at least enjoy it.

I don't know if she was raped, but rapists don't normally leave their phone number. He sounds like a jerk but it's not my place to say whether he's a rapist.

Tiger
11-25-2006, 02:06 AM
Hey, I'm just asking.

jchines
11-25-2006, 02:20 AM
We should be allowed to walk around buck naked and so drunk we're blind and not have to worry. But, in this world, we can't. We're all responsible for our actions, and though I would never ever say that it's the woman's fault because she placed herself in danger, have some smarts when you go out. Keep an eye on your drink, don't drink to excess, always travel in a pack, and if you want to have a freaking one night stand be careful who you choose and be sober so you can at least enjoy it.

I don't know if she was raped, but rapists don't normally leave their phone number. He sounds like a jerk but it's not my place to say whether he's a rapist.

Actually, well over 90% of rapes are committed by someone the victim knows -- a "friend", significant other, family member, etc. In talking to the police, they told me the actual number is probably closer to 95% or higher.

I do understand what you're saying about the difference between what should be and what is. I fully intend to teach my daughter everything I can about keeping herself safe, from watching her drink to self-defense to assertive & confident body language. Unfortunately, I'm going to do it knowing that I'll never be able to keep her 100% safe, which is why I think it's so important to keep the blame focused on the perpetrator.

Scarlett_156
11-25-2006, 02:39 AM
You just exonerated all men for behaving shabbily, in a rape thread.

Lol, no I didn't. You don't know this woman. I do. She had used her drunkenness to take advantage of men before. Perhaps to put things in a different context: If you get drunk and fall asleep on a railroad track, and the train comes along and cuts your leg off, is the engineer to blame? Is the person who sold you the booze at fault? Some might say yes, but not me.

It goes without saying that the guy was out of control, and he was being a creep. It taught me not to fall asleep at someone's house when there's a party going on. I bore him no hard feelings, but that's just me. If he had punched me or held a knife to my throat I would have felt much differently, let me assure you-- and I'm equally certain that if I had fought him off, he would have stopped. I KNOW this guy, he was a friend of mine.

I would not think of excusing the rape of any female, whether she is loose or not. This particular lady was fond of accusing various men she had slept with of "raping" her. It was just something she did. In her case it meant that she hadn't enjoyed it, not that she had been forced. (One the one occasion she WAS actually forced, hardly anyone believed her. And yes, that was a very sad thing.)

But this is all a gray area anyway. Please refer to my previous remarks about sticking one's hand in the shark's tank. There are some very bad people in this world-- people with absolutely no conscience whatsoever, who don't read what's posted on internet discussion forums like this one, and who would absolutely laugh at the question of what constitutes rape.

If you love someone, whether it be your child, your sister, or your friend-- you will watch over that person and do what you can to keep that person safe. Theorizing and argument do not make anyone safer; in fact, one might opine that they create the opposite effect. The more one thrashes about in the water, the more likely the shark is to strike.

tiny
11-25-2006, 02:47 AM
Actually, well over 90% of rapes are committed by someone the victim knows -- a "friend", significant other, family member, etc. In talking to the police, they told me the actual number is probably closer to 95% or higher.

I do understand what you're saying about the difference between what should be and what is. I fully intend to teach my daughter everything I can about keeping herself safe, from watching her drink to self-defense to assertive & confident body language. Unfortunately, I'm going to do it knowing that I'll never be able to keep her 100% safe, which is why I think it's so important to keep the blame focused on the perpetrator.

Unfortunately, it's not so black and white. A woman can scream rape after the fact and those are the women who make it almost impossible to deal with real rapists who deserve to serve time. It's unfair for a woman to spend the evening getting drunk, flirting, going home with a man to suddenly in the morning realize she's made a mistake and accuse the man of rape. It happens. I'm just saying it's not black and white.

It's very easy for us to arm-chair quarterback, but in the end, the only person who really knows what happened are the two people involved.

Look at it from a different perspective. A young man, stupid, maybe 19. Half in the bag himself, takes a girl home, doesn't actually notice that she's passed out before he gets her clothes off. Doesn't notice because he's sorta drunk too. She accuses him of rape in the morning and he spends years in prison for being young and stupid. Rape? I don't think so. Just like he should have control over himself, she should have had control over herself and to place yourself in danger, though in no way shifts what blame there may be, is foolish.

I know all about the stats, I spent the last six years teaching self-defense and came across many women who had been assaulted. It doesn't change my opinion that many women use being drunk as an excuse to do things considered less than "moral". In fact, people in general use it as an excuse, both men and women.

English Dave
11-25-2006, 02:59 AM
So you wish you had sex with a woman who was so drunk she couldn't put up a fight or consent?

No I wish I'd had sex with a woman who was sexually aggressive. Did I not make that plain?

eldragon
11-25-2006, 03:09 AM
Why was the guy making out with a girl he knew he was supposed to be taking home safely?

Doesn't that mean she didn't get home safely? He was chaperoning her to avoid that kind of thing, and instead of saying,"hey, drunk chick - I like you, lets go out for dinner sometime," and making sure she got home ok - he played games and drew on her and had sex with her before or after she passed out.

I'm sure he realized that the girl would sober up and see his giant ears and pretend like she didn't know him.

So, yeah, he took advantage of the situation.

If I were the girl, however, I would make sure I wasn't pregnant and didn't have any std's, and let it be.

I hope they change their school "laws" to require that girls are escorted by girls, boys by boys. That might help.

WriterInChains
11-25-2006, 03:41 AM
"If you love someone, whether it be your child, your sister, or your friend-- you will watch over that person and do what you can to keep that person safe. Theorizing and argument do not make anyone safer; in fact, one might opine that they create the opposite effect. The more one thrashes about in the water, the more likely the shark is to strike."


Sorry, public discussions don't cause men to rape any more than sex ed causes teenagers to have sex. Open discussion is the only way to be sure women are aware of the dangers and how to protect themselves. And, if necessary, how to cope with things that happen to them.

What about the girls who have no families? Who protects them?

Men aren't sharks, they're human beings & therefore perfectly capable of rising above their animal natures. They only have to want to.



"If I were the girl, however, I would make sure I wasn't pregnant and didn't have any std's, and let it be."

This is the LAST piece of advice I'd ever give. He already took something from her, and you're suggesting she give him her pride and dignity too? I apologize if you didn't mean it that way, but that's what the statement amounts to, IMO. If she doesn't come forward, how many other girls will he attack before he's stopped? Rape is a crime of violence, not sex.

English Dave
11-25-2006, 03:55 AM
Oh let's nail this. It's not a good idea for women to get so drunk that they can't say no. That's not sexist. That's reality.

arrowqueen
11-25-2006, 03:58 AM
I wonder if his viewpoint would change if he got blitzed out of his skull, somebody helped him home and he woke up with a sore arse?

Scarlett_156
11-25-2006, 04:01 AM
What about the girls who have no families? Who protects them?
NO ONE protects them, and just so you know, those girls scoff at pamphlets. Most of the time they can't read them anyway.

Over the weekend I had such a person at my house. (She does have a family who cares about her but so immersed in their own problems they can't help her at all.) She had a court date and her mother and I didn't want her to miss it. I ended up being her captor. Yes, I was the one who was doing wrong. She escaped. I hope she's still alive right now, and so does her mom. So it goes. (Yes, this is a true story. I posted about it on this forum before it went down, look up my posts if you are interested in the facts.)

Discussion does not help us against the truly predatory. Predators use our discussion against not us, but our friends and family members who are weaker than we are. While we talk, they stalk. I scream and rail, and carry on like a crazy person when I think someone I love is in danger. I make threats. I attack people. No one I love has ever been shark bit after I got to know him or her. Maybe before, but not after.

Discussion is titillation. The sharks don't care about it and can't comprehend it. Those who are going to fall prey within these next few weeks or months will never read these words. You think that you will "save" someone with your intentions.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

I hope this was helpful!

English Dave
11-25-2006, 04:01 AM
I wonder if his viewpoint would change if he got blitzed out of his skull, somebody helped him home and he woke up with a sore arse?

Wouldn't happen. Learn some self control.

scarletpeaches
11-25-2006, 04:03 AM
Learn some self control?

Shame the guy mentioned in the OP didn't have the same attitude.

English Dave
11-25-2006, 04:08 AM
First, read the article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/04/nrape04.xml

I did. Do you seriously think students signing a no sex contract means doodle spit? You have to be very wary of anyone who would even contemplate it.

jchines
11-25-2006, 04:23 AM
Oh let's nail this. It's not a good idea for women to get so drunk that they can't say no. That's not sexist. That's reality.

Sure. I'd say the same thing goes for men, for that matter.

Now can someone tell me why so many discussions about rape and other forms of sexual abuse end up spending so much time and energy on what the victim did wrong, and so little time on the perpetrator's actions and choices?

English Dave
11-25-2006, 04:30 AM
Sure. I'd say the same thing goes for men, for that matter.

Now can someone tell me why so many discussions about rape and other forms of sexual abuse end up spending so much time and energy on what the victim did wrong, and so little time on the perpetrator's actions and choices?

Well let's get real and talk about the OP. Rape is a contentious issue. I'm assuming that if a woman is so comfortable in my company that she feels free to get p1ssed out of her mind then.... I still might not do it. And haven't.

Perhaps I have much more respect than some women have for men.

scarletpeaches
11-25-2006, 04:33 AM
That was damn close to saying if a woman gets drunk in a man's presence then she's asking for it.

English Dave
11-25-2006, 04:37 AM
That was damn close to saying if a woman gets drunk in a man's presence then she's asking for it.

Apart from the realism. Men if drunk enough will fvck anything with t1ts. Women shouldn't complain if they get to the same stage.

Medievalist
11-25-2006, 04:41 AM
Yes, of course it's rape if a person is not capable of making a coherent decision, whether drugged or drunk.

This is why sex with minors, sleeping people, and others who are not capable of making a decision in a comprehensively aware state is illegal.

Nicholas S.H.J.M Woodhouse
11-25-2006, 04:42 AM
Apart from the realism. Men if drunk enough will fvck anything with t1ts. Women shouldn't complain if they get to the same stage.

no, men won't do that.
firstly, my best friend has tats and i've been drunk with him many times and nothing happens.

edit - secondly, if we say men will do these things (eg, feck anything with tats) when they reach a particular state of being then aren't we taking away their responsibility to be a decent person. they can just put their hands up and go, hey well, whatcanisay, i'm a man, she had tats and she was drunk up to them! and that'd be terry moore, very poor

Tiger
11-25-2006, 04:46 AM
Sure. I'd say the same thing goes for men, for that matter.

Now can someone tell me why so many discussions about rape and other forms of sexual abuse end up spending so much time and energy on what the victim did wrong, and so little time on the perpetrator's actions and choices?

You mean like this discussion? The concensus here seems to be that what happened was a rape and that the young man was to blame.

English Dave
11-25-2006, 04:48 AM
no, men won't do that.
firstly, my best friend has tats and i've been drunk with him many times and nothing happens.

I'll reserve judgement on that one.

Elodie-Caroline
11-25-2006, 05:14 AM
LOL... That would be karma ;)


I wonder if his viewpoint would change if he got blitzed out of his skull, somebody helped him home and he woke up with a sore arse?

English Dave
11-25-2006, 05:19 AM
LOL... That would be karma ;)
Nah,that would be don't get p1ssed out of your mind.

tiny
11-25-2006, 05:20 AM
I find it amazing that this becomes so rabidly men vs women each pounding their chests that their own sex couldn't possibly do anything wrong. It's very possible that this girl regretted her choice to let him come in and cried rape maybe because a roommate saw him leaving her room. It's also possible that he took advantage of someone being very drunk.

Honestly, everyone has the right to get very very drunk, so drunk they're stupid. But let's be real here, you should always be careful and when you don't you put yourself at risk to scanky predators out there.

I'm not blaming the victim, I'm being a realist. It's a sad world out there, teach your kids to be on guard. Teach them how to protect themselves.

I don't believe English Dave is saying she deserved it in any way. Men do however get tired of being called pigs and dogs and always falling into the catagory of being the root of all evils. And it is possible that she wasn't raped. It's her word against his.

English Dave
11-25-2006, 05:26 AM
I find it amazing that this becomes so rabidly men vs women each pounding their chests that their own sex couldn't possibly do anything wrong. It's very possible that this girl regretted her choice to let him come in and cried rape maybe because a roommate saw him leaving her room. It's also possible that he took advantage of someone being very drunk.

Honestly, everyone has the right to get very very drunk, so drunk they're stupid. But let's be real here, you should always be careful and when you don't you put yourself at risk to scanky predators out there.

I'm not blaming the victim, I'm being a realist. It's a sad world out there, teach your kids to be on guard. Teach them how to protect themselves.

I don't believe English Dave is saying she deserved it in any way. Men do however get tired of being called pigs and dogs and always falling into the catagory of being the root of all evils. And it is possible that she wasn't raped. It's her word against his.

Tiny, I'm not saying nothing. But as a guy I'd never do anything that made for an uncomfortable situation unless a good punch in the chops sorted those wankers out.

tiny
11-25-2006, 05:27 AM
Tiny, I'm not saying nothing.

sorry

English Dave
11-25-2006, 05:34 AM
sorry

What the hell was that!

tiny
11-25-2006, 05:37 AM
What the hell was that!

Since I obviously missunderstood and insulted you I apologized, that's all.

Little Red Barn
11-25-2006, 05:38 AM
Sex without consent is rape, and no the drunk woman did not 'ask' for it. Making yourself vulnerable does not lessen the guilt to any extent of a person who commits rape.

This is pretty much the bottom line. If the drunk woman goes to the police, and tells them this story that "she did not consent"...they are going to open an investigation, try and get a rape kit, and he's going to the hooscal! Bottom line in my neck of the woods, and according to hubby who was a Commander over Sex Crimes unit for awhile.:Shrug:

Elodie-Caroline
11-25-2006, 05:48 AM
Thankfully I've only ever done that twice in my life; lucky for me I had good friends and family around that got me home safely.


Nah,that would be don't get p1ssed out of your mind.

eldragon
11-25-2006, 05:52 AM
If I were the girl, however, I would make sure I wasn't pregnant and didn't have any std's, and let it be."

This is the LAST piece of advice I'd ever give. He already took something from her, and you're suggesting she give him her pride and dignity too? I apologize if you didn't mean it that way, but that's what the statement amounts to, IMO. If she doesn't come forward, how many other girls will he attack before he's stopped? Rape is a crime of violence, not sex.

If I were the girl, I'd be ashamed that I let myself get so soused that a strange man/boy had to escort me home. I'd be ashamed that I fooled around with him, (or not,) and passed out as he was taking my underwear off. What was I doing with a virtual stranger? That's why I would let it be, if I were the girl. I'm not suggesting anyone do that, that's what I would do. I would hope that I wouldn't do it again, and that I'd learn my lesson, and be glad that I hadn't been murdered after he raped me.

You have to have some control over yourself. You can't get falling down drunk and pass out and then sue everyone who takes advantage of you. They are wrong, of course, but you need to be smart and protect yourself.



The boy got off. He's going back to school. What about the girl?

English Dave
11-25-2006, 05:56 AM
Since I obviously missunderstood and insulted you I apologized, that's all.
I love that. Seriously.

Sean D. Schaffer
11-25-2006, 05:58 AM
Snipped...

What about the girl?


Good point. The young man got off according to the article. I'm curious what the woman had to go through in all this.

From what I read, the article seemed pretty one-sided in favor of the guy. I wonder why?

Scarlett_156
11-25-2006, 06:00 AM
I find it amazing that this becomes so rabidly men vs women each pounding their chests that their own sex couldn't possibly do anything wrong.

I never said that! I like men, and I am a woman. I don't diss men because I like them, and I don't diss women because I am one myself (women are my people, yo). Any human can do something "wrong". I know I am (human), and have (done wrong).

Sean D. Schaffer
11-25-2006, 06:09 AM
I find it amazing that this becomes so rabidly men vs women each pounding their chests that their own sex couldn't possibly do anything wrong.


I never said that! I like men, and I am a woman. I don't diss men because I like them, and I don't diss women because I am one myself (women are my people, yo). Any human can do something "wrong". I know I am (human), and have (done wrong).

Tiny Terror was not quoting you, Scarlett. Judging from her post, she was just making a general observation concerning this thread.

nicegrrl
11-25-2006, 07:54 AM
I, for one, am a five ft tall 100 lb girl and I do not take chances. I walk around with a stun gun that can kill an adult human being if hit to the right place. I keep it in my pocket- that is also where I keep my hand. I never get drunk. I see absolutely no reason to get drunk. I will not remain in any room alone with a man (unless there are people directly outside the room). I will not fall asleep in a party where men are drinking. I see no reason why other people should behave differently. If you are a girl, you should not get trashed at a house party where there are guys getting trashed. I do not care if a girl thinks she should be able to get trashed and fall asleep in some unoccupied bedroom at a party. You cannot do that because you will get sexually assaulted. Be like me and be safe.

Bartholomew
11-25-2006, 08:56 AM
I will not remain in any room alone with a man (unless there are people directly outside the room).

If you ever get married, this policy could become awkward.

But, seriously, you hang out with some bad hombres. I'm 6'2, 250 lbs, I'm alone with women all the time, and I can honestly say I've never raped any of them.

aruna
11-25-2006, 11:17 AM
The BBC article cites that adult cases have risen 15% while teen's have risen 11%, leading me to believe that the teens are merely following the examples of their elders, not leading the charge.

.

Oh, I agree absolutely. The trouble is, alcohol is glorified, and adults just laugh off getting drunk and even boast about it - it's sort of considered the norm. I was talking to the mother of a friend of my daughter's the other day, who is going to drive the girls somewhere on Boxing Day, and I was surprised how normally she spoke of all the adults having a hangover from the day before and not being capable.
I'm not trying to be a moralist here, but shouldn't being drunk something to be ashamed of? Why do people (adults) show off about how totally wasted they were, so that getting drunk become a sort of token for being a good sport?
If adults don't set a good example how are kids supposed to know better?
And it really is a British thing. I live most of the time in Germany now and the problem of teen girls binge-drinking just doesn't exist there.
I live in a sedate British town known for being boring and quiet, but if you drive into the town centre on a Friday or Saturday night you'll see hordes of drunken girls cavorting on the streets, crotch-length skirts in winter, shouting and laughing and just being generally vulgar. I've never seen this in Germany.

What you say about depression is also correct. It's the accepted thing here that you have to be drunk or at least tipsy to have a good time, which indicates a very deep inner lack.

WriterInChains
11-25-2006, 11:59 AM
What about the girls who have no families? Who protects them?
NO ONE protects them, and just so you know, those girls scoff at pamphlets. Most of the time they can't read them anyway.

Over the weekend I had such a person at my house. (She does have a family who cares about her but so immersed in their own problems they can't help her at all.) She had a court date and her mother and I didn't want her to miss it. I ended up being her captor. Yes, I was the one who was doing wrong. She escaped. I hope she's still alive right now, and so does her mom. So it goes. (Yes, this is a true story. I posted about it on this forum before it went down, look up my posts if you are interested in the facts.)

Discussion does not help us against the truly predatory. Predators use our discussion against not us, but our friends and family members who are weaker than we are. While we talk, they stalk. I scream and rail, and carry on like a crazy person when I think someone I love is in danger. I make threats. I attack people. No one I love has ever been shark bit after I got to know him or her. Maybe before, but not after.

Discussion is titillation. The sharks don't care about it and can't comprehend it. Those who are going to fall prey within these next few weeks or months will never read these words. You think that you will "save" someone with your intentions.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

I hope this was helpful!

Not sure who "those girls" who "scoff at pamphlets" are (or where the pamphlets came in??): college students? girls who party like/with guys and expect to, um, not be raped?


Discussion isn't for the benefit of the predatory, it's to keep more people from becoming prey. Knowledge isn't titillation, it's power. I don't mean to be rude, but since it seems like your post is addressing me directly I will say this -- you really have no idea to whom you're speaking.



I really should stay off TIO & keep to writing-related threads. Maybe I'll make a resolution.

britwrit
11-25-2006, 03:39 PM
Isn't teenage drinking a big problem in the states as well? I'm 36 now and live in England but I grew up in New Jersey. Back then, we started drinking heavily at 14 and began going into New York with fake IDs to hit the bars at 17. When I went out to school in Missouri, it was even worse there. Forget about what you read about the Bible Belt. In those little towns, from my friends said, there was nothing to do but drink. (Well, drink and drive. Drink and shoot off guns. Drink and climb up extremely tall water towers. etc. etc.)

So, not to go offthread, has this really changed?

MacAllister
11-25-2006, 03:52 PM
Oh, I don't really think it's changed, britwrit. It's been a problem for a long time--to the point it's become institutionalized. For example:

Q: What's a cheerleader's mating call?
A: OhmigOD, I'm sooooooo drunk!

The thing is, it seems counterproductive to think of teen drinking as the problem, when I suspect it's actually symptomatic of a deeper, more complex web of problems--neglect, abuse, lack of education, lack of supervision, poverty, boredom...

If we can't address that web of problems, culturally, then we don't stand a chance of dealing with teen substance-abuse.

britwrit
11-25-2006, 04:41 PM
:) LOL

You're right. I'm so liberal that I'm pretty much a socialist but I have to wonder what happens to a country when each succeeding generation gets its collective brains scrambled at an earlier and earlier age by a massive intake of alcohol.

Then again, our beloved Revolutionary forefathers drank cider and beer with every meal (milk was scarce and city water questionable), and it didn't seem to do them any harm. So who knows...

Cav Guy
11-25-2006, 07:10 PM
With the drinking thing, I really think it has more to do with the hyper-competitiveness that has become pervasive in American (and possibly British) society. We pack these kids off to "competitive" sports almost as soon as they can walk, always go on at them about being "winners," and so on. Well...guess what...many of them now see drinking as a competitive sport. I went to a pretty wild collge (made Playboy's party school list in the late 1980s...and close to the top), but never saw the level of "oh my God we have to get drunk" that I see now. We drank...hell yes we did. But it was never a contest to see who could get blind-puking drunk first (and I ran with a fairly heavy party crowd). The guy who had blackouts was mocked as being too stupid to know when to quit, not held up as something to admire and emulate. We also tended to look after our own. If someone was too drunk (and gender didn't matter) to look after themselves, we helped them home. The competition drunks were scorned; now they're worshipped and held up as something to be emulated.

One thing we did notice was that the women were much more likely to leave their drunk friends in bars or other places that we would never consider (parties with strangers, for one). We once had to force (by threatening to call 911) a club to call an ambulance for a girl who was in at least the early stages of alcohol poisoning. She was slumped over a table, way out of it, and it bad shape. Her "friends"? Nowhere to be found. We learned from a waitress that she'd come in with four other girls, and then they left here there when they decided to "move on." This was a "meat market" bar, too, so not the best choice on their part. I work with college kids, and from what I gather the "Look after your own" instinct is almost dead now.

eldragon
11-25-2006, 07:22 PM
I used to have a girlfriend (actually several now that I think back on it,) who routinely got so drunk she would pass out - and I had to cart her home like a sack of potatoes.

Often, she went out without me, and at least one time, a guy we all knew had sex with her in that condition. The girl (woman) was engaged and this party was supposed to be her last hurrah (sp?) before she settled down to make babies and be a wife - but she ended up sleeping with this guy ....

Anyway - she didn't mention this to her fiance and he was never the wiser - she ended up getting married and has 3 kids now.

She never considered what the guy did her to as being rape. She didn't remember anything about it, either.

scarletpeaches
11-25-2006, 07:37 PM
There was recently an uproar in British courts when a judge said it wasn't rape unless the woman said no...

...trouble is, as many victim support groups said, neither was she capable of saying yes.

I'll try and find a news link to the story. I think the bottom line was the judge was made to apologise and his retirement was hurried along. Trouble is, the 'rapist' was acquitted, so...

In that instance it would be down to the jury and the judge didn't really have a say in that, but his subsequent comments showed him to be completely out of touch with general feeling.

Sean D. Schaffer
11-25-2006, 07:46 PM
There was recently an uproar in British courts when a judge said it wasn't rape unless the woman said no...

...trouble is, as many victim support groups said, neither was she capable of saying yes.

I'll try and find a news link to the story. I think the bottom line was the judge was made to apologise and his retirement was hurried along. Trouble is, the 'rapist' was acquitted, so...

In that instance it would be down to the jury and the judge didn't really have a say in that, but his subsequent comments showed him to be completely out of touch with general feeling.


What I don't get is when a judge inserts his or her own personal opinion into a case such as this. The one time I do not hold judges in high esteem, is when they try to legislate instead of judging the laws that are already in place.

I can see why he was retired so quickly, although I think general feeling should not be the cause for such an action. My viewpoint is that the judge should have been retired because of his disregard for the law, not because he was out of touch with the general feeling.

Aside from that, I am incensed at the thought that someone who can say neither 'no' nor 'yes' cannot be raped. That is the biggest line of bunk I've heard in a long time.

And I've heard some doozies (sp?).

rhymegirl
11-25-2006, 08:34 PM
Why was the guy making out with a girl he knew he was supposed to be taking home safely?

Doesn't that mean she didn't get home safely? He was chaperoning her to avoid that kind of thing, and instead of saying,"hey, drunk chick - I like you, lets go out for dinner sometime," and making sure she got home ok - he played games and drew on her and had sex with her before or after she passed out.

I'm sure he realized that the girl would sober up and see his giant ears and pretend like she didn't know him.

So, yeah, he took advantage of the situation.

If I were the girl, however, I would make sure I wasn't pregnant and didn't have any std's, and let it be.

I hope they change their school "laws" to require that girls are escorted by girls, boys by boys. That might help.

Very good points. Exactly what I was thinking. He was supposed to make sure she got home safely. He even signed a "no sex" contract.

And yes, having a woman escorted home by another woman would have been a much better solution.

KimJo
11-25-2006, 08:58 PM
Hijacking thread and throwing this in for debate... and I may regret it, but I am curious to see what people will think.

What if the girl/woman says neither yes nor no, not because she isn't capable of answering but because she's beyond frightened of what the man will do to her if she says no?

scarletpeaches
11-25-2006, 09:33 PM
Then it's emotional blackmail or threatening behaviour on the part of the man, and still rape.

jchines
11-25-2006, 10:42 PM
What if the girl/woman says neither yes nor no, not because she isn't capable of answering but because she's beyond frightened of what the man will do to her if she says no?

1. If she's too frightened to speak, there's really no way for her to consent to anything.

2. Most state laws clearly spell out that if force, violence, or the threat of force or violence are used, it's rape.

3. I suppose it's possible for someone to be so petrified when the man in question hasn't actually threatened her. I've heard of this happening with previous rape victims when sexual activity triggers a flashback, for instance. However, if she's too frightened to say yes or no, she still can't consent.

3b. Also in such an instance, I really don't think it's asking a lot to expect us to notice that our sexual partner has gone rigid from terror.

KimJo
11-26-2006, 02:17 AM
Jchines, thanks for putting in #3. It happens with victims of previous rapes, if they have a flashback; it can also happen if the woman knows the man and knows that he has a tendency toward violence when he doesn't get what he wants, and knows the look he gets when he's on the edge of that violence. As was the case in my situation.

Threats can be worse than actual physical force; I know a woman who "allowed" herself to be raped at age 14 because if she hadn't, the man would have raped a two-year-old instead.

Kentuk
11-26-2006, 02:41 AM
Don't know enough about the situation to decide if it was rape but can't believe the school will let the scoundrel return. It shows they don't believe in their own rules.
BTW as near as I can tell I was concieved on New Years Eve (Sept 5th). Women often drink to relax their inhibitions and saying catagorically that having sex with a woman inebriated enough not to drive legally is illegal might damage reproductive rates. Also put the same woman behind the wheel with a deadly accident and the law will hold her responsible.

If the school allows the man to return I hope they get sued.

Sean D. Schaffer
11-26-2006, 07:06 AM
Hijacking thread and throwing this in for debate... and I may regret it, but I am curious to see what people will think.

What if the girl/woman says neither yes nor no, not because she isn't capable of answering but because she's beyond frightened of what the man will do to her if she says no?


I think it's definitely still rape. I mean, if the woman does not consent to the sexual act, whether or not she said 'no', she did not say 'yes', either. If a man has sex with a woman without her giving her approval, then this is rape, pure and simple, IMO.

janetbellinger
11-26-2006, 07:17 AM
Of course it is rape if the woman (or man) is afraid to say no

David McAfee
11-26-2006, 07:29 AM
I'm a thread skimmer so please forgive me if this has already been brought up, but let's look at the example of a woman getting drunk or stoned and then having sex with a guy she normally would not have sex with. Is that rape? If the sex is consesual? Granted, she's drunk and not in control of her actions, so therefore it must be rape, right?

What if the same woman, instead of going to bed with a guy, gets behind the wheel? What if she veers into some little kids who are crossing the street and kills one of them? Is she guilty of driving drunk and killing the child? Or was she too drunk to be responsible for her own actions?

At what point does the responsibility for one's own actions blur with the consumption of alcohol or drugs?

How about if the guy was drunk, too? If the woman's judgement is impaired by alcohol, is the guy's not? Can a guy who got drunk and had sex with a woman he normally would not have sex with wake up the next morning and claim the woman raped him? If he did, would anyone...anywhere...take him seriously?

WriterInChains
11-26-2006, 07:34 AM
Dude, for your own sake, please go back and read the thread. I don't think you mean to say it's the victim's fault, but that's what your post looks like, IMO.

Rape is not a crime of sex, it's a crime of violence. Yes, if a man was raped, it's still rape. And he should report it just like any violent crime. Women can be predators too and it's not any more acceptable than when men are.

Tiger
11-26-2006, 07:38 AM
I think it's definitely still rape. I mean, if the woman does not consent to the sexual act, whether or not she said 'no', she did not say 'yes', either. If a man has sex with a woman without her giving her approval, then this is rape, pure and simple, IMO.

What if she did say 'yes?'

I'm sorry, but I don't think that whether or not someone is sober enough to make an informed decision about sex could be that clearcut all the time.

Sure, it is easy to see if someone is conscious or not, but can you always know when someone has bad judgement?

David McAfee
11-26-2006, 07:40 AM
Dude, for your own sake, please go back and read the thread. I don't think you mean to say it's the victim's fault, but that's what your post looks like, IMO.

Oh, good Lord, no! That was not my intent at all. I apologize if anyone got that idea. I am only stipulating that, under the circumstances I mentioned above, (NOT the circumstances in the article) where consensual, CONSCIOUS sex is had between two people under the influence, I don't see how that could be construed as rape.

Sean D. Schaffer
11-26-2006, 07:41 AM
Snipped...

How about if the guy was drunk, too? If the woman's judgement is impaired by alcohol, is the guy's not? Can a guy who got drunk and had sex with a woman he normally would not have sex with wake up the next morning and claim the woman raped him? If he did, would anyone...anywhere...take him seriously?


I heard once about an incident in which Rush Limbaugh claimed a woman had raped him. My initial response was to laugh.

I say this because I have noticed, in some people including myself, a tendency to not believe that a man can be raped. Consciously, I'm sure a man can be, but in my subconscience, there is still the attitude that a man cannot be raped. It's an attitude that is difficult for me to change. It is a fact of my own subconscious mind that saddens me to think about, because I know this attitude is based on false ideals.

WriterInChains
11-26-2006, 07:49 AM
Like I said, David, I didn't think you meant it like that. :)

But, comparing a woman who's too drunk to consent to sex (or fight off an attacker) to a drunk driver is like saying the rapist could die from having sex with her. Unless she has a fatal and incurable disease, that's just not the case.

And, I assumed you were talking about circumstances similar to the article. Sorry if it sounded like I jumped down your throat. :)


Just for the record: I think we're all in control of our choices but not the choices of others, so there's a lot we can do to protect ourselves but it only goes so far. Hopefully, this will remain a purely abstract concept for most of us.

David McAfee
11-26-2006, 07:53 AM
I heard once about an incident in which Rush Limbaugh claimed a woman had raped him. My initial response was to laugh.

I say this because I have noticed, in some people including myself, a tendency to not believe that a man can be raped. Consciously, I'm sure a man can be, but in my subconscience, there is still the attitude that a man cannot be raped. It's an attitude that is difficult for me to change. It is a fact of my own subconscious mind that saddens me to think about, because I know this attitude is based on false ideals.

Right. And the fact is, very few people are able to overcome that line of thought. But I didn't mean to change the subject or to make the wrong impression. I shoulda just read the thread in greater detain, but I saw others were posting hypotheticals, so I added my own.

My bad. I know better than to get involved on the TIO board. ;)

WriterInChains
11-26-2006, 07:55 AM
snip!

My bad. I know better than to get involved on the TIO board. ;)
And yet we keep doing it anyway! :)
This place just sucks me in when I'm not careful.

David McAfee
11-26-2006, 08:03 AM
Like I said, David, I didn't think you meant it like that. :)

But, comparing a woman who's too drunk to consent to sex (or fight off an attacker) to a drunk driver is like saying the rapist could die from having sex with her. Unless she has a fatal and incurable disease, that's just not the case.

I don't see much of a difference there (in the consent part, NOT the attack part. THAT is absolutely, 100% foul). Either a person is in control of their actions or they aren't. Consenting to sex and fighting off an attacker are two totally different things, are they not?




I took no offense at all. I realized after reading my post and yours that mine could be constued that way. I was in the wrong there. Poor wording on my part. Again, I apologize if that's how it came across. For the record, I abhore rapists of any gender, and I think anyone guilty of such a crime is most definitely deserving of the most severe punishment allowable by law.


[quote=caren1701]for the record: I think we're all in control of our choices the choices of others, so there's a lot we can do to protect ourselves but it only goes so far. Hopefully, this will remain a purely abstract concept for most of us.

Let's hope. I don't know what I'd do if anything like that happened to my wife or my 12 year old daughter (or me), but here's to hoping I (and they) never have to find out.

David McAfee
11-26-2006, 08:03 AM
And yet we keep doing it anyway! :)
This place just sucks me in when I'm not careful.

:D Me, too.

aruna
11-27-2006, 04:18 PM
There are actually quite a few grey areas. Like how drunk is drunk? Three glasses of wine are enough to change a no to a yes in some women. If she goes on a date and says yes when she would normally have said no, yet isn't drunk but only tipsy: is it rape? If so, rape is far more prevalent than otherwise acknowedged, because that happens all the time; it's happened to me ( a LONG time ago!). And I read somewhere that more than half of all teeage girls losing their virginity do it when they were on alcohol - were they raped? And again, what if the man had been drunk, or under the influence, as well?
What if the woman deliberately sets out to get get drunk in order to have sex with strangers, a thing she wouldn't do normally?

In the example above, the man obviously took advantage of the situation and yes, he's a cad and it was rape and most people here agreed with that. It's just not always black and white, especially due to the fact that women have become far more sexually assertive and some actually use alcohol to bolster their courage. I believe that "freshers' week" is just the tip of the iceberg... might be compared to your Spring Break? (My son was in Miami for one Spring Break and he was pretty shocked by all the drinking and sex - and he's not easily shocked by any means!)

MattW
11-27-2006, 04:38 PM
There is a grey area where consent and alcohol get all mashed up. It does take someone of questionable morals (or sobriety as well) to take advantage of an intoxicated woman, but the time to make a peersonal consent decision should be when the drinking begins - if they have one (or ten) more drinks, will they be able to discern what they should be doing, and remember what they did or did not consent to.

I can admit to picking up girls in bars that were pretty loaded, as was I, and later learning that they had no recollection of the night before. If I had sex with them, would it have been rape because they remembered nothing?

But does being drunk absolve you of all of your rights? I certainly hope not - but one must be realistic about the things that can happen while drunk, and if you still proceed to blackout from drink every night...

SC Harrison
11-27-2006, 05:51 PM
There are actually quite a few grey areas. Like how drunk is drunk? Three glasses of wine are enough to change a no to a yes in some women. If she goes on a date and says yes when she would normally have said no, yet isn't drunk but only tipsy: is it rape?

No, not in that case. If she went out on a date with a specific guy and chose to drink with him, and decided after a few drinks that she wanted to have sex with the guy, it's not even close to rape.

But...if she went out on a date, had a few too many, and the guy used his physical strength to force her to have sex, even if she never said, "No", it doesn't mean she consented. Date rape is very common, and also very seldom brought to the light of day.

nicegrrl
11-27-2006, 07:06 PM
But...if she went out on a date, had a few too many, and the guy used his physical strength to force her to have sex, even if she never said, "No", it doesn't mean she consented. Date rape is very common, and also very seldom brought to the light of day.

Arent women taught not to go out and drink too much on a date with someone they do not want to have sex with?

What goes through these women's minds? "I am going to go out with this guy and get plastered, consent to going back to his place and sleep on his couch, but I do not want to have sex with him, no siree. I hope he knows that." Hello. The male of the species is programmed to spread his seed. Whether it is a crime of power, lust, control or mysogyny, a girl shouldnt test her luck against 500 million years of evolution.

It may be rape if she is drunk on a date's couch, but there are definitely ways of maximizing your chance at being raped and minimizing those chances as well.

veinglory
11-27-2006, 07:12 PM
Rape of males, by either males or females, generally involves the penetration of the male victim with a body part or object.

dahmnait
11-27-2006, 07:21 PM
He admitted that he had abused his position of trust by sleeping with the drunken 18-year-old, who he was meant to be looking after, but said that did not make him a rapist.Actually, it does make him a rapist. He knowingly took advantage of both her drunken state and his position to sleep with her. He knew her state of mind. He could have told her no. He could have stopped it at any time. At best, it is a form of date rape.

But then I am of the opinion that the "I couldn't help myself" defense is bs for either sex and any crime.

Rape does not always mean that you have to physically hurt or physically restrain a person. Anything that mentally incapacitates a party keeps them from giving consent. That is part of the reason why the term "date-rape" has come about.

dahmnait
11-27-2006, 07:23 PM
The male of the species is programmed to spread his seed. Whether it is a crime of power, lust, control or mysogyny, a girl shouldnt test her luck against 500 million years of evolution.You are right, she shouldn't, but does that mean that it is her fault when it does happen?

I understand that the world should work in a way that a woman can fall asleep on a man's couch and expect to sleep, alone. I also understand that it doesn't always work that way. However, the way you worded your post makes it seem like it's ok if a man gives in to his instincts to "spread his seed." That it's to be expected.

Women and men should do everything to protect themselves, but does that also mean that they should be ok if their lack of preparation, or plain stupidity, results in something like rape?

jchines
11-27-2006, 07:33 PM
Very rarely can a man be raped by a woman. In fact, it's almost impossible unless she's incredibly strong and he's just a little turned on, unless the definition of rape has gone way beyond what I thought it defined.

Female on male rape is much less frequent, but it can and does happen. Male arousal is not a voluntary function. Even straight males being raped by other males can become physically aroused, simply from the physical simulation.

And as was discussed earlier in the thread, state and national law varies on what is or is not sexual assault. Not all degrees of criminal sexual conduct require penetration.

robeiae
11-27-2006, 08:08 PM
I flat out don't believe it, unless the percentage is less than getting hit by an asteroid.

I may not be politically correct, but I know something about anatomy. Call me old fashioned, but I think I know the definition of rape. As far as I'm concerned, it involves force; at the least: protest, unless with a minor. I guess, jchines, I don't care what "states" say. The whole business is overblown, and rape is the latest rationale for extortion.Well, on this thread, the initial story was about a guy taking advantage of a girl blitzed out of her mind and whether that was rape. The reverse scenario does happen--a girl taking advantage of a guy blitzed out of his mind. I know it happpens, since I know someone that it happened to. Neither case need involve much force.

And the frequency of this latter kind of incident is no doubt exceedingly small. Moreover, the way a guy might react to discovering that a girl did this to him could even tend toward a "so what," or "I'm a stud even when I'm passed out." Doesn't make it any less wrong, though.

WriterInChains
11-27-2006, 08:18 PM
And it doesn't mean the man feels no shame or guilt about it later. It's just less acceptable for him to say so -- even less acceptable than for a woman. Judging by this thread, the human race has a woefully long way to go.

Celia Cyanide
11-27-2006, 08:18 PM
Actually, I think the "writing things on her body" is more in his favour... it sounds more like a twatty, jokey thing they did together than mean-spirited; which would mean she was, in her drunken state, consenting.

I didn't see it that way.

He admitted he wrote, "I pulled the president" as a joke on her stomach and said: "That's what she did — she pulled the president. I thought it was funny but looking at it now it is slightly less amusing."

I saw nothing to indicate she wanted this written on herself, or that she, also, thought it was funny. I don't think it's evidence that she was consenting. Maybe I missed something somewhere, but I didn't see it.

SC Harrison
11-27-2006, 08:24 PM
Arent women taught not to go out and drink too much on a date with someone they do not want to have sex with?



A big part of going out on a date, including the alcohol consumption part, is about getting to know someone better. If a female is attracted to a male but she hasn't known him very long, having a few drinks on a date is a way to relax enough to get a conversation going. The "too much" part is where things get a little complicated.

People who don't drink very often are prone to overlook the time lag between alcohol consumption and the effects that follow. If, during the course of the evening, she discovers she is not as attracted to the guy because of something he said or did, but she doesn't want to hurt his feelings, she may do something unwise like allow him to take her home. Even if she allows him to enter her apartment (or whatever), that still doesn't mean she has given up the right to choose.

Look, It's normal to assess an issue from our personal viewpoint, and make value judgments based on what we would or would not do in situation x or y. But relationships, especially romantic ones, require a certain amount of risk. They're mostly emotional risks, but there are also physical risks involved, too. Climbing into an automobile with someone is a huge risk (even totally sober), but people do it all the time.

Taking these risks may make it more likely you will be taken advantage of than taking no risks at all, but that doesn't mean the rapist is less guilty.

veinglory
11-27-2006, 08:26 PM
I flat out don't believe it, unless the percentage is less than getting hit by an asteroid.
.

Rape of males, by either males or females, generally involves the penetration of the male victim with a body part or object.

It does happen, often with minor children but also in group hazing situations where some or all of the perpetrators are female.

aruna
11-27-2006, 08:31 PM
I didn't see it that way.

He admitted he wrote, "I pulled the president" as a joke on her stomach and said: "That's what she did — she pulled the president. I thought it was funny but looking at it now it is slightly less amusing."

I saw nothing to indicate she wanted this written on herself, or that she, also, thought it was funny. I don't think it's evidence that she was consenting. Maybe I missed something somewhere, but I didn't see it.

I have to go back and reread the story maybe. I thought I'd read that he said she had asked him to write it. I may be wrong; or it's his word against hers.

SC Harrison
11-27-2006, 08:36 PM
The whole business is overblown, and rape is the latest rationale for extortion.

Actually, the rape itself is often a form of extortion. Are there some girls who make the claim falsely? Of course, but they only represent a tiny fraction of those who bring charges.

Check the stats, man. Something like one in four women will suffer some form of sexual assault during their lifetime. It's not a new phenomena, but we can never call ourselves "Civilized" when half our population is subject to that kind of treatment.

aruna
11-27-2006, 08:39 PM
Look, It's normal to assess an issue from our personal viewpoint, and make value judgments based on what we would or would not do in situation x or y. But relationships, especially romantic ones, require a certain amount of risk. They're mostly emotional risks, but there are also physical risks involved, too. Climbing into an automobile with someone is a huge risk (even totally sober), but people do it all the time.

Taking these risks may make it more likely you will be taken advantage of than taking no risks at all, but that doesn't mean the rapist is less guilty.

Oh, don't think I'm being prissy! I indulged in a LOT of risky behaviour in my far-off youth and can only look back in horror; that's why I CARE about these girls and wish I could give them a good shake.
But I guess they have to go through it themselves and learn the hard way, just as I did.
I just don't think it's necessary.

(Risky behaviour I indulged in: hitchhiking ALONE through Colombia. Getting into trucks with Colombian men. Sleeping alone on Colombian beaches. Sleeping in Colombian hotels without making sure the door is TRIPLE locked. Going out with strange men in London, drinking, getting drunk. I can only say I had a guardian angel and I'm lucky to have gone through it unraped. I can't count the times I;ve been groped or otherwise harassed in those situations.)

erika
11-27-2006, 08:45 PM
As a woman, I can without hesitation say that the guy was a jerk, an a**h***, but I would have found him not guilty. Since the "victim" was drunk, no one can ascertain if she consented or not (not even her). And for those of you who contend that since she was drunk, she cannot possibly consent, I say, PLEASEE. If that were true, every guy I know is a rapist, including my husband on our wedding night. (Yes, I was plowed.)

aruna
11-27-2006, 08:50 PM
I didn't see it that way.

He admitted he wrote, "I pulled the president" as a joke on her stomach and said: "That's what she did — she pulled the president. I thought it was funny but looking at it now it is slightly less amusing."

I saw nothing to indicate she wanted this written on herself, or that she, also, thought it was funny. I don't think it's evidence that she was consenting. Maybe I missed something somewhere, but I didn't see it.


I have to go back and reread the story maybe. I thought I'd read that he said she had asked him to write it. I may be wrong; or it's his word against hers.

OK, I read it again. The online story is shorter than the orginal version I read in the actual newspaper. There, he said that she had started kissing him in the taxi and had insisted he write that on her in the taxi. That's why he mentions finding the taxi driver: as a witness. Apparently no effort was made to find him.

This in no way exonerates him, of course. He had the duty to escort her home safely.

The original article also said that her friend had spoken to him beforehand and actually warned him not to touch her.

KimJo
11-27-2006, 08:55 PM
I flat out don't believe it, unless the percentage is less than getting hit by an asteroid.

I may not be politically correct, but I know something about anatomy. Call me old fashioned, but I think I know the definition of rape. As far as I'm concerned, it involves force; at the least: protest, unless with a minor. I guess, jchines, I don't care what "states" say. The whole business is overblown, and rape is the latest rationale for extortion.

You don't have to believe it in order for it to be true, however. It is entirely possible for a man who is incapacitated, by alcohol, illness, or whatever, to be raped by a female, as in her having vaginal sex with him. If he does not consent, either says no or is unable to consent, it is just as much rape as if a man has sex with a woman who has not consented. However, as Veinglory said, rape of a male often involves the male being penetrated, either by another male if the rapist is male, or by foreign objects, which could be done by a male or female. And it's entirely possible for a man to be intimidated into this situation, just as it is for a female, or to be held at the point of a weapon, just as could happen to a female. Your argument that a female cannot rape a male because females aren't as physically strong as males is only addressing one very miniscule part of how rape can be committed, and your statement that the whole business is overblown is extremely offensive to those of us who have been raped or have loved ones who have been. I sincerely hope that you never find yourself in the position of being a victim, or of having a loved one victimized.

ETA: Okay, maybe it isn't my place to say it's offensive to everyone who's been raped or has a loved one who has been, but it's plenty offensive to me.

Elodie-Caroline
11-27-2006, 09:16 PM
Er, why would a woman do that, what would be the point? A woman can get laid far easier than any man can, if she wants to get laid she gets laid... lay it on a plate and some bloke will definitely screw you. I like to think that I'm a woman of the world and am very open minded, but I can't for the life of me think that a woman would go out and get drunk just to get laid?

For me personally, getting drunk ruins the getting laid bit, it takes away the best sensations ... All I'd want to do if I was drunk would be to go to sleep :tongue.

Ellie



What if the woman deliberately sets out to get get drunk in order to have sex with strangers, a thing she wouldn't do normally?

aruna
11-27-2006, 09:20 PM
Er, why would a woman do that, what would be the point?

Ellie

The "ladette" culture demands it. The drunkenness is half of the fun. Apparently!

(It's not that they couldn't GEt it otherwise. It's that they wouldn't DO it otherwise)

aruna
11-27-2006, 09:33 PM
An interesting article on the subject. Which basically says what I've been saying: girls, for heaven's sake, BE CAREFUL!!!!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-2459964,00.html

aghast
11-27-2006, 09:34 PM
Unfortunately, it's not so black and white. A woman can scream rape after the fact and those are the women who make it almost impossible to deal with real rapists who deserve to serve time. It's unfair for a woman to spend the evening getting drunk, flirting, going home with a man to suddenly in the morning realize she's made a mistake and accuse the man of rape. It happens. I'm just saying it's not black and white.

bingo... in this case i dont really think we have enough to go on, we know the guy is in the wrong for something but to cry rape, it becomes a he said she said especially if both are intoxicated to some level - what you said does happen and people always side with the woman becauswe its the man who has the penis but if a woman takes advantage of a drunk man then it becomes 'funny' - the thing is theres a line somewhere about rape and i am not sure where it is but in this case its really murky to me - the guy is a cad thats a given but i am not comfortable about believing the woman and calling the guy a rapist - all i am saying is that its so easy for us to jump to conclusion but i think it will take a lot more investigation to know what really went on

SC Harrison
11-27-2006, 09:39 PM
All I'd want to do if I was drunk would be to go to sleep :tongue.



It would also be nice to think you could sleep on someone's couch and not wake up with someone "making love" to you.

At least when a dog is humping your leg he often looks at your face to see if you're enjoying it.

Serious thread or not, that's f***king funny. :)

Elodie-Caroline
11-27-2006, 09:39 PM
Hmm... very strange. I used to go around with bikers back in the 1980s, I used to drink pints of Beer, long before the ladette culture I hasten to add, but I certainly didn't drink pints to get laid.
My niece goes out to get drunk purposely these days... she certainly doesn't go out to get laid by strange men though.


The "ladette" culture demands it. The drunkenness is half of the fun. Apparently!

(It's not that they couldn't GEt it otherwise. It's that they wouldn't DO it otherwise)

aghast
11-27-2006, 09:39 PM
This is pretty much the bottom line. If the drunk woman goes to the police, and tells them this story that "she did not consent"...they are going to open an investigation, try and get a rape kit, and he's going to the hooscal!

does the same apply to men charging a woman for rape? i sure hope so, otherwise its double standard

Elodie-Caroline
11-27-2006, 09:51 PM
How does a woman make a man have a stiffy if he doesn't want a shag then?

aghast
11-27-2006, 10:04 PM
There are actually quite a few grey areas. Like how drunk is drunk? Three glasses of wine are enough to change a no to a yes in some women.

we all say that alcohol lessens inhibition but not change who you really are - i seriously doubt i would have sex with someone i am not even remotely attracted to no matter how drunk i am, in fact when i am drunk i stay clear from people i find repulsive - so the 'no' for me when i am sober is actually just my own prudishness and not because i dont think of having sex with the person - again, once alcohol is introduced the situation is murky so i agree with the op that if you have children, teach them to stay away from that stuff

Celia Cyanide
11-27-2006, 10:05 PM
OK, I read it again. The online story is shorter than the orginal version I read in the actual newspaper. There, he said that she had started kissing him in the taxi and had insisted he write that on her in the taxi.

In that case, the writing has nothing to do with whether or not she consented to sex. The word "pull" can also refer to the kissing. If they had done it after he had sex with her, that would be different. But they didn't.

The reason this guy bothers me is because he says he wonders why the case even went to trial. Why should he wonder that? Maybe he's innocent, but why is his time any more precious than any other male accused of rape who claims he's innocent?

aghast
11-27-2006, 10:07 PM
How does a woman make a man have a stiffy if he doesn't want a shag then?

good lord please get that myth out of your head - a man can have a stiffy even if he doesnt want to have sex with the person especially under the influence of alcohol - and i think thats the thing that always make people think men cant be raped because 'oh sure he had an erection so he must have wanted it' - thats just as bad as saying the woman 'wanted it' because she wore a low cut dress and flirted

tiny
11-27-2006, 10:12 PM
Erections are involuntary at best, and there's about a thousand reasons that cause them.

aghast
11-27-2006, 10:13 PM
I flat out don't believe it, unless the percentage is less than getting hit by an asteroid.

I may not be politically correct, but I know something about anatomy. Call me old fashioned, but I think I know the definition of rape. As far as I'm concerned, it involves force; at the least: protest, unless with a minor. I guess, jchines, I don't care what "states" say. The whole business is overblown, and rape is the latest rationale for extortion.

you are so wrong - rape doesnt necessarily involve force - men have raped women simply by psychological intimidation and the same could be said about female on male rape and its the men physiology (getting spontananeous erections) that make people not believe that men could be raped and thats just dumb and i say its double standard - many women are capable of raping men and they do, but its the men who wouldnt report because they will be the laughing stock and no one will believe them and judging from the opinions shown here id say they are right

NeuroFizz
11-27-2006, 10:44 PM
I believe it's time to teach our children, particularly male children, that this goes way beyond, "No means no." It also means that the partner has to specifically say "yes" and that it's necessary to judge that the partner displays proper judgment (mental capacity) to say yes. If one partner is drunk, this proper judgment is not there, even if it is the male who is drunk and the female is sober.

I don't understand why anyone would want to enter into such a wonderful sensory experience with their central nervous system chemically depressed. One reason I can see is the "notch on the belt" attitude, and this attitude, in my mind, is a major contributor to this type of rape (date and acquaintance rape).

Sean D. Schaffer
11-27-2006, 11:11 PM
I'm sorry, but I don't think that whether or not someone is sober enough to make an informed decision about sex could be that clearcut all the time.

Sure, it is easy to see if someone is conscious or not, but can you always know when someone has bad judgement?


Bolding mine.

You will probably be able to tell they're not sober if their breath reeks of alcohol and they're acting like a complete loon.

At least, that's the experience I've personally had with drunk people.

If they're sh!tfaced, they're not making good decisions. I can almost guarantee you that they--and their so-called lover--will regret any sexual activities they might become involved in, just about the time the hangover begins.

SpookyWriter
11-27-2006, 11:36 PM
Yup. They're right. Because there's nothing like a quick shove and a rough escort to the door to dispel any "woman's illusions" that she's going to rape a man. And "psychological intimidation" is no match for physical strength. Gimme a break.Except when the woman is 280 lbs. and the man a mere 140 lbs. Which is more common today in America than fifty years ago. :D

billythrilly7th
11-27-2006, 11:40 PM
IMO:
If she's passed out and you climb on top of her, it's rape.

If she's drunk and wants to have sex, it's not rape, just because she doesn't remember saying "Let's have sex."

With that said, I've refrained from having sex with girls who are too drunk for this very reason. I'm frightened of being accused of something I didn't do, so I just avoid the entire situation and make sure they go to sleep even though the next day the girls are like "why wouldn't you have sex with me?"

"'Cause you were really drunk and I didn't want you to do anything you'd regret."

"Ahhh, you're so sweet, Billy."

"Yeah...thanks."

I'm waiting for my laywer to finish a needs to be signed and notorized consent form that I will have with me at all times in the future.

Sean D. Schaffer
11-27-2006, 11:42 PM
Yup. They're right. Because there's nothing like a quick shove and a rough escort to the door to dispel any "woman's illusions" that she's going to rape a man. And "psychological intimidation" is no match for physical strength. Gimme a break.


Uh, BoP, your statement seems to imply that all men are capable of resisting a woman's intimidation tactics. You apparently have never been around very much. I know women personally who can easily intimidate a man twice their size and physical strength. Yes, my friend, there are women who are capable of forcing themselves upon a man. If you refuse to believe this, tough. This is the way things are, and your personal opinion is not going to change the fact that some women can force themselves upon men.

jchines
11-27-2006, 11:49 PM
Yup. They're right. Because there's nothing like a quick shove and a rough escort to the door to dispel any "woman's illusions" that she's going to rape a man. And "psychological intimidation" is no match for physical strength. Gimme a break.

You've never worked with victims (male and female) of rape or domestic violence, have you.

scarletpeaches
11-27-2006, 11:52 PM
Are we all forgetting that men can be raped quite easily by another man?

SpookyWriter
11-27-2006, 11:56 PM
Are we all forgetting that men can be raped quite easily by another man?Don't forget that women can rape other women. Prison life for both sexes must be difficult enough without the unwanted forced sex.

Celia Cyanide
11-27-2006, 11:59 PM
Yup. They're right. Because there's nothing like a quick shove and a rough escort to the door to dispel any "woman's illusions" that she's going to rape a man. And "psychological intimidation" is no match for physical strength. Gimme a break.

The definition of rape usually includes the threat of force, not just physical strength. Is it not possible that woman can use weapons, just because they might be smaller in build?

SpookyWriter
11-28-2006, 12:00 AM
Girl: "why wouldn't you have sex with me?"

Billy: "'Cause you were really drunk and I didn't want you to do anything you'd regret."

Girl: "Ahhh, you're so sweet, Billy. How about now?"

Billy: "Nah, your breath stinks."

:D Nice story, thanks for sharing.

billythrilly7th
11-28-2006, 12:05 AM
:D Nice story, thanks for sharing.

:D

Nice edits.

David McAfee
11-28-2006, 12:15 AM
I'm waiting for my laywer to finish a needs to be signed and notorized consent form that I will have with me at all times in the future.

Reminds me of an old Outland comic strip in which Opus presents a woman with a pre-encounter contract for Steve Dallas. :) I loved that strip.

aghast
11-28-2006, 12:26 AM
Yup. They're right. Because there's nothing like a quick shove and a rough escort to the door to dispel any "woman's illusions" that she's going to rape a man. And "psychological intimidation" is no match for physical strength. Gimme a break.

youre assuming all men are stronger than women - what a sexist thing to say by itself

SpookyWriter
11-28-2006, 12:38 AM
youre assuming all men are stronger than women - what a sexist thing to say by itselfSide note: The mental, physical, and spiritual strenght of women has come a long ways in the past century or two. Yes, women are becoming more dominant in our society (as rightly they should) and will someday play a more equal role in all aspects of life.

That said, we must also assume that women in twenty or thirty years will also account for more domestic violence, soft crimes, and then the equity sharing of criminal misconduct will really become a nightmare.

I could be wrong, granted, but with more power and influence also comes more opportunity for abuse. (who said that?)

SC Harrison
11-28-2006, 01:32 AM
Erections are involuntary at best, and there's about a thousand reasons that cause them.

You got that right. I can no longer wear silk boxers or smell coco-butter tanning lotion, and I damned sure can't listen to a Shakira song, even on the radio.

It would be much easier to list the things that don't cause an erection, like a trip to the dentist's office...nix that. I forgot about the chick that cleaned my teeth the last time. She just kept sticking her hands in my mouth, rubbing her fingers back and forth across my lips, humming along with the muzak...I gotta go.

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 02:45 AM
I flat out don't believe it, unless the percentage is less than getting hit by an asteroid.

I may not be politically correct, but I know something about anatomy. Call me old fashioned, but I think I know the definition of rape. As far as I'm concerned, it involves force; at the least: protest, unless with a minor. I guess, jchines, I don't care what "states" say. The whole business is overblown, and rape is the latest rationale for extortion.Let's turn this around. If a woman responds on a biological level without giving her consent, is it rape? What if a woman is incapacitated to the point of not being able to protest and no violence is used against her, is it still rape?

We are wired to respond to certain stimuli. A body can react without actual verbal or physical consent. (Physical consent being that a person is actively participating.) Some people, men and women, are more wired, or sensitive, than others so the possibility exists that the body can respond against one's will. What would you call that?

Celia Cyanide
11-28-2006, 03:03 AM
An erection, and in a woman's case, lubrication, means arousal, not consent. You might be turned on by someone, but that doesn't mean you feel like you know them well enough to have sex with them.

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 03:30 AM
I love you folks but broadening the term rape to include psychological intimidation, the magical erection and the two hundred pound woman isn't going to change the fact that rape is a FELONY, and if you are convicted of it, your life is pretty much ruined. So before you manufacture all kinds of bizarre hypotheticals, try to think about the reason why it's a felony and why it's important not to bandy about this particular accusation as if it's as traumatic as catching a peeping Tom or Teresa - as the case may be - at your window.

And BTW, the overwhelming majority of men are stronger than women. You can take it to the bank.I should know better than to read, and post, in TIO. I am having a hard time with the response that rape can't be rape if there isn't physical intimidation. I am trying to understand and I don’t mean any disrespect. Now that the disclaimer is out of the way…

Psychological intimidation can be just as intimidating as physical violence or intimidation. Depending upon the situation it can be more intimidating. The definition of rape includes psychological intimidation, as well as other situations where physical restraint or violence may not be present. The 200+-pound woman was thrown out as an example to show when a woman might be stronger than a man. A majority of men being stronger than women does not mean all men are stronger. Oh, and erections aren't magical, they are biological. Again, does a biological response constitute consent?

By your definition, slipping someone something to incapacitate them, and then performing sexual acts with them does not constitute rape, unless there is physical restraint or intimidation involved.

I don’t think anyone is saying that there aren’t people who cry rape when it hasn’t happened. (And for the record, I believe that people who accuse falsely should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.) However, you keep falling back on that argument as if the majority of rape cases are false accusations. Am I just reading you wrong?

SC Harrison
11-28-2006, 03:42 AM
That's me. Pure sexist. I love you folks but broadening the term rape to include psychological intimidation, the magical erection and the two hundred pound woman isn't going to change the fact that rape is a FELONY, and if you are convicted of it, your life is pretty much ruined. So before you manufacture all kinds of bizarre hypotheticals, try to think about the reason why it's a felony and why it's important not to bandy about this particular accusation as if it's as traumatic as catching a peeping Tom or Teresa - as the case may be - at your window.

And BTW, the overwhelming majority of men are stronger than women. You can take it to the bank.

I (think I) understand where you're coming from on this, and I agree that broadening of the scope of the "classic" rape scenario (man grabs woman and forces her to have sex) would open the doors for a much greater number of false accusations that would be difficult to defend against.

Unfortunately, the "classic" rape scenario has (for too long) been the standard that sexual assaults are gauged by. You didn't fight back and scratch his face? You weren't raped. He wasn't wielding a knife, and he didn't punch you? You weren't raped. You had been lovers in the past, but this time you didn't want to? You weren't raped. You voluntarily slept with how many others before this incident? You weren't raped.

You're right. Widening the scope would probably result in more unnecessarily ruined lives. But this is a war, Bird, and one that effects millions in this country, and God knows how many in the world at large. Predators have been hiding under society's skirts for too long, and every single one of the victims have lost their freedom along the way.

SpookyWriter
11-28-2006, 03:42 AM
And BTW, the overwhelming majority of men are stronger than women. You can take it to the bank.Sorry mate, but what country do you live in again? Not America, I'm sure of it. Women in America are becoming so obese that they outweigh men easily in purely unsaturated fat strength.

robeiae
11-28-2006, 03:51 AM
That's me. Pure sexist. I love you folks but broadening the term rape to include psychological intimidation, the magical erection and the two hundred pound woman isn't going to change the fact that rape is a FELONY, and if you are convicted of it, your life is pretty much ruined. So before you manufacture all kinds of bizarre hypotheticals, try to think about the reason why it's a felony and why it's important not to bandy about this particular accusation as if it's as traumatic as catching a peeping Tom or Teresa - as the case may be - at your window.

And BTW, the overwhelming majority of men are stronger than women. You can take it to the bank.BoP, it is true than the vast majority of rapes invlove men raping women. However, you really ought not to assume you know everything there is to know here. I gave this story once before, but here it is again:

In college, a friend of mine came home from partying, crawled up into his loft and passed out. In the wee hours of the morning, a women staying downstairs climbed up into his loft and mounted him. He awoke to her on top of him goin at it. He didn't want her there. He wanted her gone. But he had sense enough to realize the peril he was in. Tossing her off could easily have hurt her, especially since they were in a loft. And afterwards, what were his options? If he called the police, she could turn the tables on him and say he raped her. Who do you think they would believe? So he just let it go. But he didn't feel good about it. I can't speak for him or for any woman who has ever been raped, but have to imagine his feelings were not all that different from how a woman might feel.

jchines
11-28-2006, 04:07 AM
That's me. Pure sexist. I love you folks but broadening the term rape to include psychological intimidation, the magical erection and the two hundred pound woman isn't going to change the fact that rape is a FELONY, and if you are convicted of it, your life is pretty much ruined. So before you manufacture all kinds of bizarre hypotheticals, try to think about the reason why it's a felony and why it's important not to bandy about this particular accusation as if it's as traumatic as catching a peeping Tom or Teresa - as the case may be - at your window.

BoP, earlier in this thread you made it quite clear that you didn't care what the "states" said, because you knew what rape was. Now you're claiming that rape is a FELONY ... despite having proclaimed your ignorance of actual law.

Please stop. Do a little research before you make more claims based on nothing more than the way you think things should be. Sexual assault laws are far more discriminating than you seem to understand. They vary from state to state, country to country. They include both felonies and misdemeanors, depending on factors including the victim's age, the use of weapons, whether penetration is involved, etc.

Also please keep in mind that for many of us, these are not hypotheticals. Not everyone here has the luxury of discussing sexual assault as a purely intellectual exercise.

billythrilly7th
11-28-2006, 04:25 AM
Girls should have "YES Hearts" on them at all time.

And the only legal form of consent between a man and a women to have sex is for that women to sign and date the heart and give it to the man and say "I Yes Heart" you.

And with all these variables that was she too drunk or not or did she consent or not, that's the man's legal protections against rapes that may not be rapes like this story.

"Hey, she may not remember, but here's my yes heart with her legal signature and the date."

Problem solved.

Next?

P.S. Guys, don't lose your "Yes Hearts." Safety deposit box them.

P.S.S. Cancel the whole thing. Forged signatures and whatever could ruin the whole thing.

Back to the lab again.

Elodie-Caroline
11-28-2006, 05:11 AM
That would be a darn sight easier than a woman trying to rape a man.


Are we all forgetting that men can be raped quite easily by another man?


Re: With the woman raping a man bit... Besides her ramming something in the same place that another man could; if the man didn't want his penis inside her, he would go limp, I couldn't think of any one woman that I know who would try and force a limp one inside of her, it would be like trying to shove a Slug into something with no give.
Yes, blokes don't have control when they wake up and need a pee and they have a stiffie, but there is no way I can see that he is going to have an erection for a woman whom he doesn't want to shag in the first place.

nicegrrl
11-28-2006, 05:38 AM
There are very very few cases of women raping adult men. It's sort of a 1 in 10,000 type of crime. Psychological intimidation is not rape. It could be blackmail or something else, but it isnt rape unless you can prove the realistic threat of violence, not a threat of theft, libel, defamation etc. A woman will not win a rape case if she claims she did not fight a rapist because she was arbitrarily afraid of being hurt. Indeed, she may have been afraid she would get hurt, but that will not send anyone to jail.


In college, a friend of mine came home from partying, crawled up into his loft and passed out. In the wee hours of the morning, a women staying downstairs climbed up into his loft and mounted him. He awoke to her on top of him goin at it. He didn't want her there. He wanted her gone. But he had sense enough to realize the peril he was in. Tossing her off could easily have hurt her, especially since they were in a loft.

Since he did not make a real effort to stop the sexual activity, this isnt rape. Had he remained unconscious it would have been rape.

robeiae
11-28-2006, 05:46 AM
Since he did not make a real effort to stop the sexual activity, this isnt rape. Had he remained unconscious it would have been rape.You're not making sense. The sexual activity began while he was unconscious. So it was rape, and then it wasn't?

aghast
11-28-2006, 05:56 AM
That's me. Pure sexist. I love you folks but broadening the term rape to include psychological intimidation, the magical erection and the two hundred pound woman isn't going to change the fact that rape is a FELONY, and if you are convicted of it, your life is pretty much ruined.


i suggest you speak with some real rape victims - male or female - before you open your mouth - i will side with rape victims every time before i consider how awful it must be to be accused of being a rapist - if someone is innocent justice will be served and names will be cleared but please dont tell the victims that theyre asking for it because they have a friggin erection, or they dress provocatively or whatever - sheesh

nicegrrl
11-28-2006, 05:57 AM
So it was rape, and then it wasn't?

Then, but once he got up and let it continue, that wouldnt go anywhere in a court even if she admitted to doing it.

aghast
11-28-2006, 06:00 AM
Yes, blokes don't have control when they wake up and need a pee and they have a stiffie, but there is no way I can see that he is going to have an erection for a woman whom he doesn't want to shag in the first place.

youre either not a man or you dont know your own physiology and how simple stimuli can cause erections in a healthy male no matter how much he doesnt want to shag

aghast
11-28-2006, 06:01 AM
Then, but once he got up and let it continue, that wouldnt go anywhere in a court even if she admitted to doing it.

it started as a rape and it will always be rape - get it right girl - it doesnt matter if he did anything after he woke up, the rape had already happened and yes it will go very well in court - check your fact before you speak, you are embarrassing all the women here

robeiae
11-28-2006, 06:03 AM
Then, but once he got up and let it continue, that wouldnt go anywhere in a court even if she admitted to doing it.He was afraid. And like I said, if he tossed her off and she got hurt, he'd be in a world of trouble.

But regardless, I don't get what you are trying to say, here. I have specifically said that women raping men is far from common. To try and diminish the few times when it is a reality serves no purpose that I can fathom. So please, explain.

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 06:31 AM
There are very very few cases of women raping adult men. It's sort of a 1 in 10,000 type of crime. Psychological intimidation is not rape. It could be blackmail or something else, but it isnt rape unless you can prove the realistic threat of violence, not a threat of theft, libel, defamation etc. A woman will not win a rape case if she claims she did not fight a rapist because she was arbitrarily afraid of being hurt. Indeed, she may have been afraid she would get hurt, but that will not send anyone to jail. You state this as if it is a forgone conclusion. It's not true. Thank god the legal system does not work this way!


Since he did not make a real effort to stop the sexual activity, this isnt rape. Had he remained unconscious it would have been rape.
and






So it was rape, and then it wasn't? Then, but once he got up and let it continue, that wouldnt go anywhere in a court even if she admitted to doing it.
Again, thank god the legal system does not work this way!

When I get over my anger from these kind of statements I may have more to say. Right now, being respectful is a bit difficult. I just hope and pray that you are never in a situation where you have no control. I hope and pray that you never have to make a decision about fighting back.

Sean D. Schaffer
11-28-2006, 07:18 AM
I know exactly where you're coming from Rob, but the incident you describe doesn't sound like rape. "Letting her finish" because he didn't want her to "hurt herself" sounds more like he was ambivolent; at the very least, he was certainly unduly concerned about his "attacker," or he would've tossed her off - loft or not. I think when you're being hurt, your reaction is gut, you know? Rape is an assault. Although she didn't have his consent, she didn't have his outrage, either. I'm suspicious.


Bolding mine.


You're not the man's judge, and you probably don't know the extent of the situation.

You can argue until you're blue in the face that a woman cannot rape a man, but I've seen it happen. Defined in the Dictionary, the word Rape (in the sexual sense) is as follows:

Unlawful sexual activity and usu. sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury.

If you will note the wording of this definition, sexual intercourse is not necessary for the situation to be considered rape. The first three words in this definition point out that unlawful sexual activity is just as much rape as is intercourse done under threat of injury or carried out by force.

So it doesn't have to be intercourse, BoP. It has to be unlawful sexual activity or forced intercourse. Technically speaking, a woman who comes on to a man too strongly despite repeated refusals, could be considered a rapist because she did not respect his refusals....even if the man finally throws her down and forces her to leave.


*Definition taken from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, New Edition, Copyright 2004 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated.

engmajor2005
11-28-2006, 07:21 AM
I live in NC, so I was audience (willing or not) to the media vultures covering the Duke rape case. If you're not familiar, google "Duke lacrosse rape case." You'll find something, guaranteed.

And of course, many of the people I see every day say "She was a stripper. That was an occupational hazard."

Well, I work in the public. At any moment somebody could come into my workplace wielding a gun and shoot me. Does that mean that they're not a murderer? Hey, occupational hazard. If you go out driving and you're killed by a drunk driver, does the occupational hazard of getting hit excuse that driver?

I say that no means no means no means no means no.

I say that if you know that somebody is wasted and you take advantage of them, you are a rapist.

I say that if you don't want and they give it anyway, you've been raped. Plain and simple. Even if you wake up and find them going at it, and you just lie there and take it, IF YOU DO NOT WANT IT YOU ARE BEING RAPED AND YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO TAKE THEIR *** TO COURT OVER IT. If they don't want to go to jail then they need to leave sleeping, NON-CONSENTING people alone.

As for the jerk whose little escapade started this discussion, he is a rapist. THE ABSENCE OF PROTEST IS NOT CONSENT. She never implied that she wanted to have sex vocally or with her body language, and I don't care that she was fubared she didn't want it so it's rape.

If a person is a sex addict or for some medical reason they cannot control their urges, they need to seek help. If they have raped because of this, then they still need help but it doesn't erase the fact that such a person is a danger to society.

As for "normal" guys--well, I can keep it tucked away in the presence of drunken females; so can you.

Sean D. Schaffer
11-28-2006, 07:35 AM
Thanks, Ian. And no, we sure don't travel in the same circles.


Bolding Mine.


Pfft. You're not worth my time, BoP. You don't know me from freakin' Adam. And you most certainly do not know who I run with.

*Plonk*

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 07:37 AM
I think you are arguing that a biological response can happen in a complete void. In other words, a man can have and maintain sexual arousal under extreme "psychological" duress, not to mention physical. He can have and maintain an erection in order to have sex completely unrelated to terror, acute anxiety or physical force. Wow.How long does the act have to last before it is considered rape?

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 07:39 AM
Tammy, I'm not sure what your question is here. I have no problem with the accusation of rape if it is rape, meaning, the victim was forced to have sex. The details during the act are - to me - insignificant.But your definition of forced is purely physical violence. That is not always the case. As for the question, it was better stated in the other post you answered. :) (see above)

BottomlessCup
11-28-2006, 07:48 AM
THE ABSENCE OF PROTEST IS NOT CONSENT.

How is the male populace supposed to deal with a standard like this?

To be sure, the guy in this case is a sh1tbird. Having sex with an unconcious person is wrong, wrong, illegal.

But. If a concious doesn't give some sort of protest, how is the guy supposed to know she doesn't want to have sex? (Of course, "some sort of protest" can mean lots of things.)

Actual, spoken, verbal, literal consent is a rare thing. How many people regularly say, "Would you like to have sex with me?" "Yes, I would like to have sex with you?"

Most of the time, consent is implied - in my experience, it's implied multiple ways. Kissing back, pulling clothes off, that sort of thing. But I don't know how other people's relationships work. Or how some girls may act.

If the girl doesn't give him a reason to believe that she doesn't want to have sex with him, how is he to know?

Obviously, a weapon or violence or threat of violence changes the ball game. But we're not really debating whether sex-by-gunpoint is rape, are we?

I would never try to place blame on a rape victim, but in most scenarios that don't involve violence, I think it's reasonable that the victim give some indication that they don't consent. I think that's fair.

Again, obviously an unconcious person is incapable of that. If you have sex with an unconcious person, you're a rapist IMO.

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 07:51 AM
Another thought, why does it have to be that a man has to physically penetrate the woman for the woman to rape him. I will try to be delicate with the descriptions. What if a woman is rubbing her naked self over the man, does that not constitute? Or are we working with a double standard when it comes to what can be done to an unwilling man? Additionally, some men can still penetrate even when they are not fully erect. He doesn't have to be fully erect for the woman to take advantage of him.

Rape is typically a crime of power. Any sexual act that is forced on another person is rape. It doesn't matter how the force took place. It doesn't matter if it is a woman or a man. And, I am not talking how rape is handled in a court, that is when it can become a matter of degrees. I am talking about the actual act itself. It is rape, no matter if someone tacks "date" or any other description to the word rape.



I hope this makes sense. I am trying to multi-task as I write this.

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 07:53 AM
Well, dh, I can only say that since a common complaint is that it doesn't last long enough, I guess I'd have to let, uh, the jury decide.But according to your posts, the jury would never see the case. After all, a man can't be raped right?

engmajor2005
11-28-2006, 08:06 AM
How is the male populace supposed to deal with a standard like this?

To be sure, the guy in this case is a sh1tbird. Having sex with an unconcious person is wrong, wrong, illegal.

But. If a concious doesn't give some sort of protest, how is the guy supposed to know she doesn't want to have sex? (Of course, "some sort of protest" can mean lots of things.)

Actual, spoken, verbal, literal consent is a rare thing. How many people regularly say, "Would you like to have sex with me?" "Yes, I would like to have sex with you?"

Most of the time, consent is implied - in my experience, it's implied multiple ways. Kissing back, pulling clothes off, that sort of thing. But I don't know how other people's relationships work. Or how some girls may act.

If the girl doesn't give him a reason to believe that she doesn't want to have sex with him, how is he to know?

Obviously, a weapon or violence or threat of violence changes the ball game. But we're not really debating whether sex-by-gunpoint is rape, are we?

I would never try to place blame on a rape victim, but in most scenarios that don't involve violence, I think it's reasonable that the victim give some indication that they don't consent. I think that's fair.

Again, obviously an unconcious person is incapable of that. If you have sex with an unconcious person, you're a rapist IMO.

The absence of protest is not consent, likewise the absence of consent is not protest. It's tricky yes, but just because a woman doesn't say no doesn't mean that she's consenting. She could be afraid that the man will physically harm her if she protests. She could be so nervous (especially if she is a virgin) that she can't formulate the concept of consent/protest at the time. She could just be the passive type, and enjoys being submissive, and is fully consenting.

As far as "asking nicely"...well, I do. The last time I was in sucha position, I said "Do you want to?" She said no. We didn't. It's not that hard if you're a rational thinker.

Granted, if she's doing a strip tease on the bed and doing that "come here" thing with her finger, then she OBVIOUSLY has something in mind. That would be, in my book, consent.

Maybe I'm just biased because I have had first-hand experience with rape victims and seen how much the experience damages your psyche. Maybe I'm just playing it way too safe. But I always side with the accuser until given a reason not to in rape cases. And yes, shady dealings by the accuser can be reason not to side with them.

engmajor2005
11-28-2006, 08:23 AM
It's a slippery slope, but in principle, I agree.

The only exception I would make is if you're both gone out of rationality. Two people being so intoxicated that neither knows what they're doing is entirely possible, though it stands to reason that should these two people be that drunken then sex isn't going to happen for reasons of the body not being able to function properly.

BottomlessCup
11-28-2006, 08:31 AM
The absence of protest is not consent, likewise the absence of consent is not protest. It's tricky yes, but just because a woman doesn't say no doesn't mean that she's consenting. She could be afraid that the man will physically harm her if she protests. She could be so nervous (especially if she is a virgin) that she can't formulate the concept of consent/protest at the time. She could just be the passive type, and enjoys being submissive, and is fully consenting.

Which is my point exactly. We're talking about prison, a life-long state-mandated stigma, and various other severe repercussions.

If the woman was conscious and reasonably sober and gave no indication that the sex was unwanted, I don't see how it could be rape. In that scenario, the man has no reason to believe that she wasn't interested in having sex with him. (And again, "reasons" could be a lot of things, including body language and other non-verbal clues. A hand brushed away would be enough to give me pause.) In the absence of threats, violence, or incapacitation, I think the woman needs to give some form of objection - or it's not rape in my opinion.



But I always side with the accuser until given a reason not to in rape cases. And yes, shady dealings by the accuser can be reason not to side with them.

I don't think you're alone there. Which is why I believe that the media shouldn't release the names of the accused until conviction. (Like they do for the accuser.) The stigma is severe.

engmajor2005
11-28-2006, 08:36 AM
So I say cook up a less hefty offense that doesn't carry the stigma or penalties of rape. Call it inapporpriate sexual conduct if you want, or whatever. But still, a sensitive enough guy will know when it's not okay, even if the girl is not responding either way.

And by the way, I say it goes both ways. Men can be raped just as easily, and the same rules apply.

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 08:58 AM
The 1986 federal statute defines two types sexual assaultJust to let you know, the federal statutes have been updated since 1986. And since you didn't post it, it falls under Title 18, Chapter 109a.

To update your list:

From Section 2241. Aggravated sexual abuse

knowingly causes another person to engage in a sexual act -
(1) by using force against that other person; or
(2) by threatening or placing that other person in fear that
any person will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or
kidnapping;

or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
for any term of years or life, or both.
(b) By Other Means. - Whoever, in the special maritime and
territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal
prison, knowingly -
(1) renders another person unconscious and thereby engages in a
sexual act with that other person; or
(2) administers to another person by force or threat of force,
or without the knowledge or permission of that person, a drug,
intoxicant, or other similar substance and thereby -
(A) substantially impairs the ability of that other person to
appraise or control conduct; and
(B) engages in a sexual act with that other person;


To add to your list of statutes:

From Section 2242. Sexual Abuse

(1) causes another person to engage in a sexual act by
threatening or placing that other person in fear (other than by
threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person
will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or
kidnapping); or
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other
person is -
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or
communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
not more than 20 years, or both.




Section 2246 deals with definitions where it states that the definition of "sexual act" is contact without clothes and any penetration is stated as, "the penetration, however slight".

I am not putting the full text here because of the nature of the definitions.

aruna
11-28-2006, 09:15 AM
As for the jerk whose little escapade started this discussion, he is a rapist. THE ABSENCE OF PROTEST IS NOT CONSENT. She never implied that she wanted to have sex vocally or with her body language, and I don't care that she was fubared she didn't want it so it's rape.

.

To be fair: actually, she did. That online version was heavily abridged; in the original print version, SHE was the one who initiated sex in the taxi. She started kissing him and asked him to come up to her room for sex - according to him. She later deneied it, saying she couldn't remember anything. That was his defence, and I suppose that's why he got the not guilty verdict. He claimed the taxi driver could witness that, but the police never attempted to find the driver. In the end it boiled down to he said, she said.

IMO, though, he was gui9lty due to the fact that he was a) sober b) reponsible for getting her home safely c) had signed a no-sex contract and d) she was unconscious.

BottomlessCup
11-28-2006, 09:31 AM
IMO, though, he was gui9lty due to the fact that he was a) sober b) reponsible for getting her home safely c) had signed a no-sex contract and d) she was unconscious.

I disagree with all of that except "d".

His being sober is irrelevant, IMO.

He being "responsible for taking her home" is irrelevant, too. If my girl and I go out and I'm the driver, I'm responsible for getting her home. It doesn't mean no sex. He could be responsible for getting her home and the sex could still be consensual.

As for 'c', I'm no lawyer, but I would assume the 'no-sex contract' has all the legal weight of those 'abstinence contracts' people get their kids to sign. If the sex was consensual, the contract wouldn't matter and we never would've heard about any of this.

But 'd', yep. That's why I think he raped her. There's no excuse for having sex with an unconcious person. Even your wife/girlfirend. It's wrong and icky.

aruna
11-28-2006, 10:33 AM
I disagree with all of that except "d".

His being sober is irrelevant, IMO.

He being "responsible for taking her home" is irrelevant, too. If my girl and I go out and I'm the driver, I'm responsible for getting her home. It doesn't mean no sex. He could be responsible for getting her home and the sex could still be consensual.

As for 'c', I'm no lawyer, but I would assume the 'no-sex contract' has all the legal weight of those 'abstinence contracts' people get their kids to sign. If the sex was consensual, the contract wouldn't matter and we never would've heard about any of this.

But 'd', yep. That's why I think he raped her. There's no excuse for having sex with an unconcious person. Even your wife/girlfirend. It's wrong and icky.

Your argumens make sense; but I'm speaking of him being morally guilty rather than legally. I find the idea of a sober man having sex with temporaily crazy woman (that's what drunkenness iss, after all) repulsive. He was to bring her home safely, and promised not to touch her.
the document? Well, if he though she had consented then I suppose it's a moot point. But we're back to the "can a drunk woman consent" argument.

aghast
11-28-2006, 10:44 AM
people do many bad things - the girl shouldnt drink to oblivion, those people shouldnt ask a guy to take her home - alone without other people around - and the guy shouldnt take advantage of her no matter how much she 'wanted it' under influence but still rape is a serious thing/charge and it comes down to he said she said unfortunately theres no good way to judge so it comes down to whos side what you want to be on - hers because shes a victim of a sexual crime or him because you dont believe what he did is enough to send him away and lock him up for the rest of his life - that should make for a good questin for a party 'ethics' game

Elodie-Caroline
11-28-2006, 02:29 PM
No, I may have a lot more balls than a lot of men, but I'm not actually a man...


youre either not a man or you dont know your own physiology and how simple stimuli can cause erections in a healthy male no matter how much he doesnt want to shag

aruna
11-28-2006, 02:36 PM
(Totally off topic but so many posters here use avatars of the gender they are not - gets VERY confusing! Anyway, I hope you like my new one. It's a very accurate likeness.)

Celia Cyanide
11-28-2006, 05:41 PM
A woman will not win a rape case if she claims she did not fight a rapist because she was arbitrarily afraid of being hurt. Indeed, she may have been afraid she would get hurt, but that will not send anyone to jail.

How do you know that? In many states, force or threat of force defines rape. If he threatens to hurt her if she does not do what he wants, that is not consent, and in most states, it fits the legal definition of rape.

jchines
11-28-2006, 06:15 PM
How do you know that? In many states, force or threat of force defines rape. If he threatens to hurt her if she does not do what he wants, that is not consent, and in most states, it fits the legal definition of rape.

The problem is, so many of these cases come down to his word against hers. Typically, rape isn't a crime committed in front of witnesses, and there's no way to prove a threat was made. Take the case in the OP as an example.

It fits the legal definition, but it can be incredibly difficult to prove, especially when the defense is busy attacking the woman for drinking/dressing provocatively/not fighting hard enough/etc.

With that said, if there's evidence or a confession that threats or coercion was used, I could see a rape victim winning a case like that.

robeiae
11-28-2006, 06:20 PM
I know exactly where you're coming from Rob, but the incident you describe doesn't sound like rape. "Letting her finish" because he didn't want her to "hurt herself" sounds more like he was ambivolent; at the very least, he was certainly unduly concerned about his "attacker," or he would've tossed her off - loft or not. I think when you're being hurt, your reaction is gut, you know? Rape is an assault. Although she didn't have his consent, she didn't have his outrage, either. I'm suspicious.
1) You're assuming a level of maturity/understanding with regard to the individuals involved. You can't do that. Just because he was unsure of what to do, her actions are not somehow justified.
2) You're trying to guess at motivations/states of mind. You can't do that, either. First, because not everyone's mind works in exactly the same way and second, because I haven't given you enough information.

Your attempt to minimize this incident is instructive, however, since it is a fair reflection of the treatment/criticism women can receive when they come forward with a charge of rape. Such a response is predictable from the accused and/or his lawyer, but the reality is that such a response often comes from pretty much everyone. That's why these incidents are so under-reported.

And all of what I'm saying probably has a few of you scratching your heads. What's my angle, here? Simple--I believe in justice and that the worst offenses should have the worst punishments. I pretty much equate rape to murder and fully support Capital Punishment for those found guilty of it.

dahmnait
11-28-2006, 06:24 PM
Your attempt to minimize this incident is instructive, however, since it is a fair reflection of the treatment/criticism women can receive when they come forward with a charge of rape. Such a response is predictable from the accused and/or his lawyer, but the reality is that such a response often comes from pretty much everyone. That's why these incidents are so under-reported.Thank you. That is what I wanted to say but I just couldn't get it out as eloquently as you have put it here. Well said.

robeiae
11-28-2006, 08:10 PM
And Rob, regardless of his age or his intent or his confusion or whatever, he could've stopped it. More often than not, a physically weaker person - which generally fits the description of women I know compared to men - cannot.When it comes to right and wrong, the capabilities of people are inconsequential. It doesn't matter a whit if he could have stopped it. Suppose he was a parapalegic. What she did would have been no more and no less wrong in my view.

And when it comes to the law, you really can't base statutes on things like capabilites. It cannot be, by rule, more of a crime for person x to do A, than for person y to do A, because of assumed characteristics possessed by x. To allow such would be totally contrary to the concept of equality before the law. End of story.

aghast
11-28-2006, 08:53 PM
So I don't want the term rape applied to every last awkward or even humiliating situation, because lesser terms apply. People do stupid and even awful things, but the gravity of those acts has to be measured very carefully. Rape is not a casual accusation. But, I know you somewhat, so I know it's needless to say.

goodness, are you saying there are degrees of rape? so if a burly guy forces himself on a woman its a big rape but if a woman molests a half-drunk guy who is too afraid to do anything its 'all good and fun'? please stop this nonsense - whether its difficult to prove or he said she said (as in the op case) is something else but all things considered a rape is a rape is a rape and it doesnt matter how it happened - there is no 'lesser term' to apply - if the guy being raped by the woman cried 'rape' he could very well be charged with rape himself and be chastised by the whole community and he chose not to do anything except to his friends but that does make the womans action any less than rape - sorry you are dead wrong because if you apply the same thing are you saying that if a woman who could beat a man to pulp for some reason (psychological, etc) couldnt and let the guy finish, she wasnt raped? dont be ridiculous - she was violated whether she fought him off or not - same goes with the guy who was raped with the woman at the dorm

robeiae
11-28-2006, 10:10 PM
I'm not justifying her actions, Rob, but I am making certain assumptions, which I think is prudent if we're about to give her "Capitol Punishment" for that. Hmm?I'm not saying it should always be the punishment, but there are plenty of times where it should be. And with this particular incident, understand this: he was in his bed, in his apartment. She broke in (window, we think) to do what she did. If he even tried to accuse her of B&E, five will get you ten she would have accused him of rape. And probably kidnapping, as well.

You're right, it really wasn't a big deal...

engmajor2005
11-28-2006, 10:23 PM
I have to ask you BoP, if a person jumps out from behind a dumpster in a dark alley wielding a knife and demands all my money, and I don't even try to attempt to wrest the knife away, does that mean I wasn't robbed?

Following your logic, I would have to fight back and if the robber was still successful then I've been robbed. If not, I've freely given up my possessions. Unless of course I'm unable to fight back (not as strong as the victim, not armed, outnumbered, etc.) of which I am excused from fighting back and hence am free to comply and then seek legal aid.
That's an odd mix of Libertarianism and Marxist "from each according to his needs" thinking.

Not to mention it reads like a Dungeons and Dragons Rulebook.

engmajor2005
11-28-2006, 10:27 PM
To be fair: actually, she did. That online version was heavily abridged; in the original print version, SHE was the one who initiated sex in the taxi. She started kissing him and asked him to come up to her room for sex - according to him. She later deneied it, saying she couldn't remember anything. That was his defence, and I suppose that's why he got the not guilty verdict. He claimed the taxi driver could witness that, but the police never attempted to find the driver. In the end it boiled down to he said, she said.

IMO, though, he was gui9lty due to the fact that he was a) sober b) reponsible for getting her home safely c) had signed a no-sex contract and d) she was unconscious.

A kiss is not an invitation for sexual intercourse, and unless she explicitly said "Let's go up to my place for sex" then she did not ask for sex. Hell, even if she did come out and say what she wanted and communicated to him between then and later that she changed her mind, it's still rape. Besides, I'm sorry. She was drunk out of her mind. He shouldn't have taken anything she said seriously, and shouldn't have gone into her apartment with her. The fact that he did so is suspicious enough.

I mean, let's be honest: college guys don't go into the private dwellings of drunken college girls to tuck them in and read them a bedtime story.;)

robeiae
11-28-2006, 10:46 PM
Capability has everything to do with whether a crime could or could not have been committed.It is a component for dtermining guilt, to be sure. But it is not (or should not be) a component of defining an illegal activity, with regard to general assumptions of capability. When you suggest that the capabilties of an apparent victim are a consideration in determining whether or not a crime occured, you're making a legal error.

Example: Fred attacks John for no reason and breaks his jaw. George attacks Mary for no reason and breaks her jaw. Fred is not less guilty of a crime, or guilty of a lesser crime, than George simply because John is a former green beret and Mary is 75 years old and uses a walker. But that seems to be what you are suggesting.

robeiae
11-28-2006, 10:50 PM
No one said it wasn't a big deal, Rob. Please don't start exaggerating. Either I missed it or you omitted the fact that she broke in.

Sorry, BoP, but you said:

"Letting her finish" because he didn't want her to "hurt herself" sounds more like he was ambivolent; at the very least, he was certainly unduly concerned about his "attacker," or he would've tossed her off - loft or not.

Turning what I call a rape into a so-so incident that the victim was "ambivolent" about seems to be pretty much saying it was no big deal.

And I did not explicitly say she broke in, but since he was asleep in his bed, I'm not sure how she could have been invited in.

aghast
11-28-2006, 11:30 PM
Tell you what, since it's obvious that you're deliberately misrepresenting what I say, this will be my last response to you. Perhaps you should feel as inflated as your rhetoric.

i am hardly the only one 'misrepresenting' you - perhaps you should reread what you posted and think about what you said

MacAllister
11-29-2006, 01:09 AM
A new member, alices--who can't post in TIO yet--asked that someone post this link, here:

RE: the discussion going on in TIO: Is it rape if the woman is drunk, IMHO, as a rape survivor the thread had drifted so far from reality that I posted a duplicate in O.P. with the following link:
http://www.calcasa.org/34.0.html

This is the site for, The California Coalition Against Sexual Assault (CALCASA) - Myths and Facts

I was hoping that someone would post the link in TIO for me.

dahmnait
11-29-2006, 02:30 AM
Beautiful! She needs to get her post counts up. :D


Myth: Men can never be raped.

The assumption in this myth is that men are always in control. Also part of it is the denial that comes with the fear heterosexual men feel about male-to-male sexual contact.

Fact: Men can be and are sexually assaulted.
and since we were talking about men being raped by women.

Women raping men is rare, but not unknown. Most situations reported involve a woman assailant in conjunction with a male assailant, a group of women targeting a male victim, or a woman exploiting a male’s inability to resist because of too much alcohol or other conditions. hmmm...

Wait that goes right back to the OP. Change it to a man exploiting a woman's inability to resist because of too much alcohol or other conditions, and you have the situation the OP referenced.

Please people, read the whole article. The information is very good.

English Dave
11-29-2006, 02:48 AM
Thanks, Mac and alices. I think it says all that needs to be said.

meh....she was asking for it.

WackAMole
11-29-2006, 02:56 AM
I am more disturbed by the size of that guys ears than anything else atm...


Tough situation but I'm afraid I'd lean towards a 'yes' on the rape call

Pick him up by his ears and toss him in the can.

tiny
11-29-2006, 05:52 AM
I am more disturbed by the size of that guys ears than anything else atm...


Tough situation but I'm afraid I'd lean towards a 'yes' on the rape call

Pick him up by his ears and toss him in the can.

That's the problem. You can't just lean. It's got to be a 100%. We're talking about a person's life. You've got to be sure. I'm not discounting her at all. But he is also a person, be it a crumby person, but that isn't against the law. We have to be sure before we lynch a man.

(you meaning everyone, not just you WaM, and yeah, those are some freaky ears)

dahmnait
11-29-2006, 06:16 AM
BoP,

I want to see where you stand on this scenario.

A woman and a man live together. They are a couple and have had consensual sex in the past. The man starts having sex with the woman while she sleeps. She tells him no, yet he continues. That is the first night. However, this continues night after night. On the subsequent nights, the woman, afraid of the ramifications, pretends to stay asleep while the man does his act.

What is this and why?

Celia Cyanide
11-29-2006, 06:22 AM
If that's your argument for rape, Rob, you ain't gonna make it beyond a grand jury, at least not if there's any sanity left in this world.

Judging from what Rob has said so far, I think he knows that wouldn't make it beyond a grand jury. That doesn't mean it isn't rape, however. It just means that the man wouldn't win his case.

Just an aside, I don't think that you can really say what a normal person would do if they woke up to find someone on top of them having sex with them. Speaking for myself, I know I'm very confused when I wake up, and I don't always know where I am. Just the other day, I came home and Lantern Jack had been sleeping. He was acting strange, and I suddenly realized that while he was wide a wake, it was a few minutes before he had any idea who I was.

robeiae
11-29-2006, 06:23 AM
Let me get this straight, Rob. A woman, presumably a stranger, breaks into your apartment. You wake up to find this person on top of you. Instead of doing what any normal person would do: react violently, you think, wait, I don't want anything to happen to this person, even if she's assaulting me, so I'll just let her finish what she's doing. If that's your argument for rape, Rob, you ain't gonna make it beyond a grand jury, at least not if there's any sanity left in this world. And instead of erroneously paraphrasing you, Rob - like you do me - I'll just quote you: end of story.BoP, everyone does not react the same way. And show me evidence that any "normal person" would react violently.

Christ, I'm not trying to take it to the grand jury. But trying to brush it off by second-guessing someone's actions, who was clearly in an unexpected and never-before-imagined situation, is just not fair. Not in the least. And once again, your insistance that there is an easily followed course of action that any "normal person" would follow is instructive as to why rape, of any type, is so under-reported.

And erroneously paraphrasing? I quoted exactly what you said. Tell me how your comment wasn't minimizing the incident.

But beyond that, I don't think a rape accusation should be a slam-dunk for a conviction, not by any stretch of the imagination. The same standards of evidence and the like must be observed. In the story I have given, I think it almost impossible that the guy could have successfully pressed charges for rape, for reasons I have given. And if you think you could have tossed her off without potential consequences, you're in la-la land. One call to the cops from her and one bruise on her body lands your @ss in jail--trial in 4-6 months.

robeiae
11-29-2006, 06:24 AM
He was acting strangeYou're gonna need to go a little further here...



Teasin! Just teasin! :D

Celia Cyanide
11-29-2006, 06:35 AM
I mean strange by lantern jack standards, ok??? ;)

Kentuk
11-29-2006, 08:47 AM
I hope this is a repost but males are raped by men. Rape is under reported and I would not be surprised if the proportion of male rape victims who refuse to report is significantly higher then female victims.
I suppose it is possible that a woman could rape a man but men are wired wierd and are susceptible to being seduced when it is obviously a bad idea. Men may be chemically prone but it is necessary to hold them responsible for their actions.

SpookyWriter
11-29-2006, 09:02 AM
I hope this is a repost but males are raped by men. Rape is under reported and I would not be surprised if the proportion of male rape victims who refuse to report is significantly higher then female victims.
I suppose it is possible that a woman could rape a man but men are wired wierd and are susceptible to being seduced when it is obviously a bad idea. Men may be chemically prone but it is necessary to hold them responsible for their actions.Wow, that's really stretching it. Do you have any supporting evidence to back up this claim?

What is chemically prone? I am aghast that this viral statement is just tossed out there as factual basis for understanding why men rape women. Please enlighten me...

Kentuk
11-29-2006, 10:01 AM
Wow, that's really stretching it. Do you have any supporting evidence to back up this claim?

What is chemically prone? I am aghast that this viral statement is just tossed out there as factual basis for understanding why men rape women. Please enlighten me...

No, it sheds no light on rape. Rape is violence. You need to go back on your meds. Get a grip.

SC Harrison
11-29-2006, 05:49 PM
BoP,

I want to see where you stand on this scenario.

A woman and a man live together. They are a couple and have had consensual sex in the past. The man starts having sex with the woman while she sleeps. She tells him no, yet he continues. That is the first night. However, this continues night after night. On the subsequent nights, the woman, afraid of the ramifications, pretends to stay asleep while the man does his act.

What is this and why?

She does this from fear. Not necessarily a fear of physical harm, but a fear of a total loss of freedom to choose. As long as she is "sleeping", there is no contest for domination (she believes).

And yes, there is such a thing as marital rape.

nicegrrl
11-29-2006, 08:42 PM
Again, thank god the legal system does not work this way!

When I get over my anger from these kind of statements I may have more to say. Right now, being respectful is a bit difficult. I just hope and pray that you are never in a situation where you have no control. I hope and pray that you never have to make a decision about fighting back.

The legal system does work that way because of the fundemental concept of being innocent until proven guilty BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. Rape couselors will tell a woman that never fought back that she was raped and it was not her fault. This is not enough in court. The absense of protest almost never results in a rapist going to jail even when the case goes to court. Using the excuse of being too afraid to fight back will not work unless the victim can prove there is an objectively understandable reason that the victim was too afraid to fight back. If a woman lays down in a room and an acquaintance/date etc comes in, and the conscious woman does not object to him taking off her clothes and having sex with her- that is consent as far as the jury can tell. If she was too afraid to protest that will not send anyone to jail.

dahmnait
11-30-2006, 03:59 AM
I made a blanket statement in response to a blanket statement. I was wrong to do so. I appreciate you changing your words from "never results" to "almost never results". There is a big difference between the two phrases. Of course you followed it up with another generalized statement when you said;

If she was too afraid to protest that will not send anyone to jail.

This statement isn't true. These are always case by case situations. There are many reasons why criminal acts (not just rape) aren’t prosecuted. The two major culprits are legal mistakes and/or lack of evidence that will convince beyond a reasonable doubt. Not being prosecuted does not make the person any less guilty if they committed the crime.

In your example:

If a woman lays down in a room and an acquaintance/date etc comes in, and the conscious woman does not object to him taking off her clothes and having sex with her- that is consent as far as the jury can tell.Of course, given this exact scenario, any reasonable person would see it as consent - as long as conscious means that she was alert and aware. If there was additional information, then it may be rape. Did she protest? Did she give any indication that she didn't want this to happen?

If she told the person, "No," it is rape, regardless of whether or not she physically fought back.

If she was asleep when this started and had given no prior indication that this was acceptable to her in this instance, it's rape. Regardless of whether or not she woke up in the middle of the act, she was asleep when it started and was unable to give consent.

If this was an ongoing situation like my example above, and she was afraid of the ramifications of protesting, it is rape.

If, in a variation of my example above, she told her intimate partner never to have sex with while she is sleeping and he does so anyway, it is rape.

The act of raping someone is not dependant upon whether or not the case is prosecutable. I think that is where the major hang-up in this thread is coming from. The original question asks, “Is it rape?” The answer is yes. Is it prosecutable? Well, that depends upon the individual case.

dahmnait
11-30-2006, 04:20 AM
I think SC summed it up as much as possible and I really don't want to comment without enough information. You said she's afraid of the ramifications. What are the ramifications? Are you saying that he's physically forcing her regardless of her objection?
I am not so sure that my example is needed. Although I may come back to this. I think that we are getting hung up on the legalities of rape as opposed to the physical act of rape. I could be wrong though. You can see my last post for what I mean by this.



ETA: Added the quote. I forgot to reference why I posted this. :)

aruna
11-30-2006, 10:12 AM
A kiss is not an invitation for sexual intercourse, and unless she explicitly said "Let's go up to my place for sex" then she did not ask for sex. Hell, even if she did come out and say what she wanted and communicated to him between then and later that she changed her mind, it's still rape. Besides, I'm sorry. She was drunk out of her mind. He shouldn't have taken anything she said seriously, and shouldn't have gone into her apartment with her. The fact that he did so is suspicious enough.

I mean, let's be honest: college guys don't go into the private dwellings of drunken college girls to tuck them in and read them a bedtime story.;)

I think when a stock-drunk woman starts kissing a man in a taxi on the way home - especially in Freshers' Week, when new students are mating like rabbits all over the place, and everyone knows it - then yes, it was supposed to lead to sex, and I don't blame him for thinking so. BUT he was apparently sober. A sober man quite simply needs to keep his filthy hands off a drunk woman whom he does not know. If they were already friends or even partners, and she's drunk and starts kissing him,. it's a different thing altogether. In this case, he had taken on the responsibility of getting her home safely. And yes, that would include taking her to her room, undressing her if she had passed out, tucking her into bed, AND NOT TOUCHING HER sexually. No matter what she says and does. In this situation you are expected to keep your brains out of your pants.

aghast
11-30-2006, 05:47 PM
i have had enough drunken sex - alcohol is a great ice breaker - i would never had done things i have if i wasnt fui - so i am not comfortable to say in this case of the woman is really 'asking for it' or not, again it comes down to he said she said and no they shouldnt but many people do have sex while drunk, still if she didnt want sex and he f-ed her then its rape but its hard to prove in court - its two different things, whether it is rape or if it can be proven in court - all i know is that when i was drunk it only lower my inhibition but not my 'standard' i mean i wouldnt have f-ed something i normally wouldnt alcohol or not

Tiger
11-30-2006, 10:41 PM
This piece seems to have a bunch of related issues in it. It is amazing what some guys will say when facing serious time.

http://starbulletin.com/2006/11/30/news/story03.html

David McAfee
12-01-2006, 12:21 AM
I think when a stock-drunk woman starts kissing a man in a taxi on the way home - especially in Freshers' Week, when new students are mating like rabbits all over the place, and everyone knows it - then yes, it was supposed to lead to sex, and I don't blame him for thinking so. BUT he was apparently sober. A sober man quite simply needs to keep his filthy hands off a drunk woman whom he does not know. If they were already friends or even partners, and she's drunk and starts kissing him,. it's a different thing altogether. In this case, he had taken on the responsibility of getting her home safely. And yes, that would include taking her to her room, undressing her if she had passed out, tucking her into bed, AND NOT TOUCHING HER sexually. No matter what she says and does. In this situation you are expected to keep your brains out of your pants.

Nice use of the word filthy to generalize. :) You could have said "in this case" first. Not all men are like this guy. "A sober man quite simply needs to keep his filthy hands off..." implies that any man is prone to this sort of thing. BUT.... since the topic is being discussed....what if the man was drunk, too? Who's fault is it, then? If the woman is too drunk to be responsible for the act of sex, then is a drunk man any more responsible?

I made this point before, but I may have been misunderstood. While the man in question here (in the initial article) is certainly a pig, what would happen if the drunk woman got behind the wheel instead of going home and having sex with some guy she barely knows? If she got pulled over for DUI, is it the cop's fault for catching her? the bar's fault for serving her? Who's fault would it be?

At what point does personal responsibility fly out the window?

Now, having said that, let me just add that taking advantage of an unconcious woman who is unable to resist or even say "no" is certainly rape, and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

dahmnait
12-01-2006, 01:16 AM
I don't understand your use of the term "bait". Did you read the previous post?

I was trying to make a point with the example. I clarified that point in this post (http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=951094&postcount=250). Am I wrong that we are getting hung up on whether a rape is prosecutable as opposed to whether or not the physical act is rape? If we are getting hung up, then what you have been saying may not be what I am reading. If not, then I'll go back to the example. I have no problem with that.

I wasn't baiting you, I just didn't feel like I needed to write the same thing in back to back posts.

Peggy
12-01-2006, 02:40 AM
I think when a stock-drunk woman starts kissing a man in a taxi on the way home - especially in Freshers' Week, when new students are mating like rabbits all over the place, and everyone knows it - then yes, it was supposed to lead to sex, and I don't blame him for thinking so. I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with this. Just because other people are having sex, one drunken woman making out with a guy does not automatically mean that she wants to have sex with him. I think the idea that sexy behavior, be it kissing or doing a striptease or dirty dancing, automatically is consent for sex is simply wrong. Lots of girls (and women and boys and men for that matter) behave with fewer inhibitions when they've been drinking, and unfortunately end up doing things without realizing what they are doing. A drunken woman may not even fully realize what is going on or be able to clearly articulate a "no" if a guy starts having sex with her. A couple who gets drunkenly married in Vegas aren't considered to have knowingly given consent and the marriage can be annulled. This is different from the situation we are talking about, because during a marriage ceremony the couple must actually articulate "I do". Even so, drunk = no consent.
In this case, he had taken on the responsibility of getting her home safely. And yes, that would include taking her to her room, undressing her if she had passed out, tucking her into bed, AND NOT TOUCHING HER sexually. No matter what she says and does. In this situation you are expected to keep your brains out of your pants. That's what makes this case so disgusting. He was sober. He knew she was drunk. He had voluntarily taken the responsibility to see that she got home safely. He was not forced into having sex. Of course the girl was dumb to get trashed to the point of insensibility. She was a fool to think that a guy would actually see her home without taking advantage of her drunkeness. That doesn't mean the guy is any less a rapist.

dahmnait
12-01-2006, 03:04 AM
Tammy,

Here's the situation. She says no to the guy. He persists. She pretends to be asleep. Why does she pretend to be asleep and tolerate that?

Is she scared of him physically? Is it money? What's the problem?

Cuz nothing shrinks it like than the word divorce.
Ok, by the lack of response to my last post I am going to assume for the moment that you feel a crime is not a crime until the person perpetrating said crime has been prosecuted and convicted. Until I know differently, that is the way I will treat the posts.

As for your response to my example/question, if we are going to go back to it, then I am going back to it with my original intent in mind. So bear with me please. (I promise I won’t be as flip as your response was when I asked how long an act has to take place before it is considered rape. ;)) I say this because I was going to post a follow-up question, and given the prior posts, I don’t want you to think I am baiting you or avoiding your questions.

I purposely left the ramifications vague. I wanted to know where you draw the line, but I couldn’t ask that without knowing where you stood on the example as a whole. So, what kind of ramifications do you feel would make it rape? And in the same vein, what ramifications do you feel make it consent?

I am really trying to understand your rationale.

Toothpaste
12-01-2006, 03:38 AM
Tammy, BoP, I am confused. What's the debate that's going on between the two of you right now?

David McAfee
12-01-2006, 06:00 AM
She was a fool to think that a guy would actually see her home without taking advantage of her drunkeness.

Clarify, please. "A" guy, as in "any" guy, or just this particular guy?

Let's not generalize by gender, now, please. I've never had sex with a woman who was so drunk she couldn't articulate the word no, or even with a woman who was so drunk I thought she wouldn't remember it the next day. Most guys I know have never done something like that, either.

aruna
12-01-2006, 09:49 AM
I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with this. Just because other people are having sex, one drunken woman making out with a guy does not automatically mean that she wants to have sex with him. I think the idea that sexy behavior, be it kissing or doing a striptease or dirty dancing, automatically is consent for sex is simply wrong. .

Generally speaking I agree with you but we are talking about a specific case. This was Freshers' Week. Freshers Week is synonymous with unlimited sex and alcohol. My son just started at Brighton University and he even got sent a leaflet all about sex and alcohol in Freshers Week and how to keep safe (I actually found it presumptious that they assume everyone is going to act that way!) The basic premise in Freshers Week is that everything goes, and these days women are often the initiators of sex. And I guess that's why they appointed these older students to be reponsible and not indulge.

(Back in the day, BTW, when a man started kissing you you always knew he wanted sex. It was up to you to say no. What if the roles are reversed these days? I don't know. I'm completely out of that loop!)

And its easy to say what a guy should think, but I think it's also perfectly easy to understand what he did think. And the thing is, we weren't there. I was not a witness to what happened; all we have to go with is his his testimony, according to which her behaviour in the taxi made him thnk she wanted sex.

And I think you'll agree that even though kissing isn't automatically an invitation to sex, some kissing certainly can be. A woman can kiss a man in a way that most definitely says that she wants sex, and as she was drunk and as it was freshers week this is quite likely. We just don't know what went on in that taxi, and for me it's no problem to give him the benefit of the doubt as far as the "she wanted sex" thing goes. I really don't think it was a chaste peck on the cheek.

NEVERTHELESS - even if she had stripped naked and told him in so many words that she wanted sex - he should have abstained.

Peggy
12-01-2006, 11:16 AM
And its easy to say what a guy should think, but I think it's also perfectly easy to understand what he did think. And the thing is, we weren't there. I was not a witness to what happened; all we have to go with is his his testimony, according to which her behaviour in the taxi made him thnk she wanted sex. I think this is where we are having the disconnect. It doesn't matter what he thinks. Lots of guys think a particular woman wants to have sex with him. Back in the dark ages when I was in college they warned us about sexual assault, and it was pointed out that most assaults are not committed by random strangers. The real problem is assaults by acquaintances and "friends", probably mostly well-meaning young men who were sure that the woman they were with wanted to have sex (for stats, see page 27 of this report (http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/210346.pdf) (pdf)). It doesn't matter if every other person in the room is f*cking like bunnies, no one should automatically assume consent. If he had been partying along with the other students, it would have been different, because his judgement would have been impaired as well. This is different - he was sober. Based on this particular situation, it doesn't look that this young man is a menace to society, but he definitely behaved as a sexual predator and he has to come to terms with that.

We just don't know what went on in that taxi, and for me it's no problem to give him the benefit of the doubt as far as the "she wanted sex" thing goes. I really don't think it was a chaste peck on the cheek. It doesn't matter what went on the in the taxi. He knew she was drunk. She may have been behaving sexily and given him a deep soul kiss. Doesn't matter. A passionate kiss does not equal consent for sex. And yes, I'm sure he thought "she totally wants me". The problem is that she was intoxicated and may have been thinking something along the lines of "woooooooo weeeeeee ooooh kisssy mmmmmmm". Drunken people do lots of stuff without considering the consequences. Any sober person who doesn't realize that is an idiot (particularly someone who has been in college several years, has undoubtedly seen all kinds of stupid drunken behavior, and who was hired specifically to see drunken 18-year-olds home safely).
(Back in the day, BTW, when a man started kissing you you always knew he wanted sex. It was up to you to say no. What if the roles are reversed these days? I don't know. I'm completely out of that loop!) I'm well out of the dating game, but from what I've observed the sexual dance is a tricky one. Either a man or a woman may initiate dancing or kissing or more, and if the other person isn't interested or has limits to how far they want to go, they need to indicate by actions or words that they've gone far enough. I've observed that intoxicated people often have a hard time realizing when those signals need to be sent and are really baffled that others misinterpreted their behavior. That's why it's rape when one person is drunk and the other is sober - the drunk person may not really grasp that they are consenting to anything.

Peggy
12-01-2006, 11:24 AM
Clarify, please. "A" guy, as in "any" guy, or just this particular guy?

Let's not generalize by gender, now, please. I've never had sex with a woman who was so drunk she couldn't articulate the word no, or even with a woman who was so drunk I thought she wouldn't remember it the next day. Most guys I know have never done something like that, either. Sorry, I did mean this particular guy. The men I associate with are gentlemen, and I assume that's true with any guy I meet, unless his behavior shows otherwise.

aruna
12-01-2006, 11:36 AM
If he had been partying along with the other students, it would have been different, because his judgement would have been impaired as well. This is different - he was sober. Based on this particular situation, it doesn't look that this young man is a menace to society, but he definitely behaved as a sexual predator and he has to come to terms with that.
.

I agree.

Melisande
12-01-2006, 12:41 PM
A rape is always an act of violence!

Having sex with someone who has been too drunk to know the difference, is also an act of violence, because it is basically an act of selfishness; "Yeah, I knew she was drunk, but I was horny...., didn't know she would've said no had she had the chance..."

Therefore I think that any peron who commits rape should be punished accordingly!

Toothpaste
12-01-2006, 10:39 PM
It frustrates me all this talk about sexy kissing implying the person wants sex. I lost my virginity later than most, but had no problem fooling around with a guy before that. The line between making out and sex may seem small, but it is huge. The risks double at least with sex (STD's and pregnancy). And yes, while the concept of anything goes is well known for freshers week, I would hate to think that it was almost mandatory to have sex, that it was expected of you and if you participated in activities (activities designed for the kids to meet new people and get to know the university, not only to have a dionysian orgy) then you had to sleep with someone. Or that if you didn't want to have sex then you should avoid any parties or having fun or drinking alcohol just in case you sent out the wrong signals and some sober boy took you home and had sex with you while you were unconscious. If I had read your post about freshers week before I had gone through it, I would have been terrified! But as it was I had an amazing time.

I also don't think we are giving enough credit to men here. All of the men I know would never take advantage of a drunk girl, especially if they were stone cold sober. This guy isn't representative of all men out there. He's an a**.

aruna
12-02-2006, 10:25 AM
It frustrates me all this talk about sexy kissing implying the person wants sex. I lost my virginity later than most, but had no problem fooling around with a guy before that. The line between making out and sex may seem small, but it is huge. .

I didn't say it did. I said it CAN, depending on what the kissing is like; and we all know the difference. These days women DO initiate sex pretty often, a thing that almost never happened a few decades ago.
All I am saying its that it can be confusing for a modern man to know what a woman wants if she starts kissing him; especially during freshers week. And I think that freshers week in the UK is a whole different animal to anywhere else. That's the impression I get, anyway; really a dionisian orgy! I do get reports of contemporary life though my son of 21, who, being pretty good looking himself, had to develop his own ethical code. He is not happy with young English women and their sexual behaviour; he prefers older women who have calmed down, or non-British.

Toothpaste
12-02-2006, 10:48 PM
Come on I was being colourful with saying dionysian orgy, I like the image, and besides I went to many a toga party in my day (which was less than a decade ago I might add). I know what you mean Aruna, I know you are not saying the woman is asking for it. I know it's confusing, that's why this thread has gone on so long. I just hate the idea of girls being frightened to have fun and be silly, because if they do the wrong thing then a guy will assume she wants sex and will take advantage of her. Yes girls should be careful, but men have to be respectful, and there is nothing respectful about a sober guy having sex with a wasted girl, especially a wasted girl who is unconscious. I'd hate to think we have to tell our girls, don't drink, don't dance, don't flirt, don't kiss, or else this will happen to you.

dahmnait
12-03-2006, 12:10 AM
Tammy, BoP, I am confused. What's the debate that's going on between the two of you right now?I was trying to get a handle on BoP's thought process and reasoning.

http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=949115&postcount=239 (http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=949115&postcount=239)

http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=949740&postcount=247 (http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=949740&postcount=247)

http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=949975&postcount=248 (http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=949975&postcount=248)


If you want to read further than the ones above, posts 249, 250, and 251 also pertain. Then in posts 256 and 257 we were just hashing out what baiting means. It ends with 258, 260, and 261. (Well, it doesn't really end since I am going to respond.)

Hope that helped clarify what we are talking about. I certainly helped me realize where my time has been going. :D

dahmnait
12-03-2006, 01:12 AM
I say it's rape the second she says "no" and he continues anyway but she puts up with it because she wants his money or his antique car collection.I had to escape from this thread for a bit. I am all ready to pick this back up, but when I re-read your post I was confused. I think your edit changed what you were trying to say. I don't know what to respond to until I know whether or not it did. :)

SC Harrison
12-03-2006, 03:33 AM
I'm saying: is she "putting up" with his behavior for financial gain or is she "ignoring" it because she fears him?



I'm not sure if my take on this is the same thing as Tammy's, but I do want to make a few observations (surprise!).

You have listed two reasons why she knowingly allows him to use her body in this way, but I think you're overlooking a much more complex (but also common) psychological issue, which is loss of control/loss of identity.

A relationship can stand many things, as long as there is a certain degree of mutual respect and admiration. As a relationship grows and matures, these understood aspects become a part of an individual's identity, as solid as the floor under our feet. The loss of this foundation is more fearful to our brain than almost any physical harm, because (we think) it threatens our very reason for existing. This is one reason (imo) that people cling to relationships that are plainly unhealthy and sometimes dangerous, because breaking away seems like a drop into the abyss.

In the case of the wife who fakes sleep, she may be perched on the edge of accepting that much of what she took for granted about her relationship is not real, and maybe never was. This is a horrible place to find yourself, and your brain will cook up some weird rationalizations to keep you from falling.

Tiger
12-03-2006, 03:40 AM
It frustrates me all this talk about sexy kissing implying the person wants sex.... I also don't think we are giving enough credit to men here. All of the men I know would never take advantage of a drunk girl, especially if they were stone cold sober. This guy isn't representative of all men out there. He's an a**.

It's somewhat frustrating to me that some can so readily accept the view that women are injured, domesticated birds with no power and no free will.

I rather like Tiny Terror's POV.

SC Harrison
12-03-2006, 04:26 AM
I can accept that, SC, but at what point are we responsible to preserve our own identity? Potentially painful, humiliating circumstances can crop up often enough in anybody's life. It's a question of whether we let them become humiliating, isn't it?

No doubt. At the end of the day, we must face up to whatever is plaguing us and overcome it. But it is also important for us to understand that denial is a natural phase in the way we deal with a crisis, and not necessarily a weakness we should be ashamed of at some later date.

Toothpaste
12-03-2006, 08:53 AM
Tiger I'm not quite sure whether you didn't approve of my post or not, but I don't think I implied that women were helpless with no free will. I was addressing the issue of what someone had brought up as almost no free will. That going out for freshers week it is virtually expected that you have sex, where I think you need to take each individual circumstance as just that, and each individual as an individual. Of course women need to take care of themselves, after all the only one you can really trust is yourself. But I don't think a woman is choosing sex if she goes a bit far with the sexy kissing. I hope it didn't come across that everyone must tip toe around women because they are delicate and vulnerable. I just want everyone to treat each other with respect, that's all. I also think in an ideal world a woman expresses her wants from the off. But sometimes people don't know what they want. Sometimes the girl wants sex. She wants it, and then gets frightened, or thinks better of the situation and that's her perogative. And so can a guy! Anyway, I hope that clarifies things. I"m not sure it did at all!

Tiger
12-03-2006, 09:03 AM
Tiger I'm not quite sure whether you didn't approve of my post or not, but I don't think I implied that women were helpless with no free will. I was addressing the issue of what someone had brought up as almost no free will. That going out for freshers week it is virtually expected that you have sex, where I think you need to take each individual circumstance as just that, as each individual as an individual. Of course women need to take care of themselves, after all the only one you can really trust is yourself. But I don't think a woman is choosing sex if she goes a bit far with the sexy kissing. I hope it didn't come across that everyone must tip toe around women because they are delicate and vulnerable. I just want everyone to treat each other with respect, that's all. I also think in an ideal world a woman expresses her wants from the off. But sometimes people don't know what they want. Sometimes the girl wants sex. She wants it, and then gets frightened, or thinks better of the situation and that's her perogative. And so can a guy! Anyway, I hope that clarifies things. I"m not sure it did at all!

Nope, I was not arguing with you. I was just doing a bounce off from your "not giving men enough credit" statement (which I appreciate, by the way), by saying that we're not giving women enough credit either.

-D

Toothpaste
12-03-2006, 09:31 AM
Oh good! I confuse myself more often than not, so it's only natural that I assume I'm confusing everyone else. But I didn't! This is a moment for Toothpaste to celebrate. Or maybe just go to bed and get some sleep.

Scarlett_156
12-03-2006, 10:19 AM
See the tank? See the shark people? Keep your hand out of there! Tell your loved ones to keep their hands out, unless you like blood and possible dismemberment. (and if you do what's wrong with you? the needle tears a hole....)

End communication.