Rape: Do victims of rape share any responsibility?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Major logical fallacy here Tom. By proxy, and according to your reference if I was to get wasted and someone was to beat the hell out of me and rob me then it's my fault cause I'm drunk? That's a masked man fallacy. In the actions listed by the author while drunk all the action, except the sexual assault, all were criminal acts for which a person should rightfully be prosecuted but in the case of an incapacitated woman being raped, she is the victim of a crime and not the perpetrator. The authors argument completely falls apart on that point.
 
My but you are the tenacious one! Do you think that staying all night waiting for me will get you some smarty points? Don't worry I've found a man now to do some mansplaining on my behalf.

Feminist college “consent guide” advocates radically broad definition of rape, encouraging false accusations

Posted by: Jonathan Taylor (TCM) in Due Process, Rights & Protections September 28, 2013 3 Comments

The last time this site reported on a Feminist article on AlterNet Education it was by Dr. Nancy Cohen who complained that a school’s “no bellies, buns, or breasts” dress code promotes “rape culture.” Today we have a somewhat higher quality gem from Alternet Ed titled “Feminist Activists Launch A Consent Guide To Help Fight Rape Culture On College Campuses.” From the article:
.
A sexual assault prevention group is launching a college-themed guide for consensual sexual activity, hoping to inspire students to implement programs on their own campuses that will help encourage “the culture of consent.”
The online magazine includes profiles of college activists who are working to encourage healthy sexual relationships at their schools, quizzes to help readers assess how well their own university is handling these issues, information about federal laws that forbid gender discrimination in academic settings, and suggestions for campus events to spread the word about consent.
.

When a person’s understanding of the level of required consent is below the legal standard, acting upon it becomes an act of rape. When a person’s understanding of consent is above the legal standard and that person accuses someone of rape under those erroneous standards, it is a false accusation of rape. What this means is that any guide to consent needs to provide clear and consistent standards that are reflected in the law. Unfortunately, that is not what this guide does.

For example, on page 5 it says “Consent is a verbal agreement between two people about how and when they are comfortable having sex.” And on page 12: “Consent needs to be verbal because body language can be misinterpreted.” While body language can indeed be misinterpreted, the idea that consent needs to be verbal for it to be genuine is incorrect. According to this guide, a woman who wants to have sex can nod her head, she can wink, lick her lips, smile, grab a man’s penis and pull him toward her vagina, but if she doesn’t specifically say “yes,” he’s a rapist. This is incorrect.

Page 12: “Consent must be enthusiastic!” Wrong. Enthusiastic consent makes for better sex, but “enthusiasm” does not make or break consent. Remember that consent is an element of everything that we do. If you make a donation to a charity, does it have to be “enthusiastic” for it to be consensual? And when an administrator is hearing a case and determining whether it was rape or sex, how would (s)he really measure “enthusiasm” anyway?

Page 13: “No means no.” Question: if a man says “would you like to have sex” and a woman smiles and in a sarcastic and teasing tone says “no, that would be horrible!” while pulling the man’s penis into her, is it rape? Or think about it this way: if “no always means no” regardless of body language, location, context, tone, and so forth, does yes always mean yes regardless of those factors as well? If a man puts a gun to a woman’s head and says “will you have sex with me” and she says “yes,” is it consensual? Or is it not always that simple?

And let’s remember that while most Feminists agree that “no means no,” not all of them agree that yes means yes. Feminist professor Susan Estrich says in her landmark book Real Rape (page 318), “Many feminists would argue that so long as women are powerless relative to men, viewing ‘yes’ as a sign of true consent is misguided.” Similarly, Feminist professor Carol Pateman of UCLA says in “Women and Consent,” published in Political Theory (vol. 8, p. 149): “Consent as ideology cannot be distinguished from habitual acquiescence, assent, silent dissent, submission, or even enforced submission. Unless refusal or consent or withdrawal of consent are real possibilities, we can no longer speak of ‘consent’ in any genuine sense.”

Coming back to the “consent guide”:

Page 21: “[Being] drunk does not equal consent.” Not necessarily. Being drunk to the point of incapacitation (being wasted) is nonconsent. Numerous colleges make this distinction. For example, Kennesaw State University’s student handbook (page 188) says that nonconsent is present when someone is “incapacitated by drugs, alcohol, or medication.” It does not reference the state of “being drunk,” let alone refer to it as a determinative factor.

The idea that drunk people are responsible for their actions is understood in virtually every act other and situation than women and sex. When people drive while drunk, they are arrested – regardless as to whether they were asked repeatedly (“coerced”) by their friends to drive them from Point A to Point B. When drunk people use drugs, they get busted. When drunk people beat their spouses, their children, or assault others, they are arrested. Being drunk does not mean you are not responsible for what you do. Unless – according to a Feminist – you are a woman in a place where you can substantially deprive a man of his liberty, or destroy his career or reputation by a mere accusation.

This guide also foments rape hysteria by radically overstating the degree of sexual assault on college campuses. For example, page 15 says ”nearly 1 out of 4 college-aged women are sexually assaulted or raped.” This isn’t anywhere near the truth. Simply compare the campus crime reports of any university you want and – even if you factor in underreporting – the numbers will be orders of magnitude below the 1 in 4 figure.
At my alma mater A&M-Commerce, a school with ~11,000 students, the crime reports document an average of one sexual assault accusation a year…if you round up. And that’s just an accusation. It’s not saying whether the accusation was true or false. But according to the 1 in 4 figure, there would be around one thousand rapes at A&M-Commerce every year. Yes, other universities have higher figures. But they also have much higher enrollments as well.

What’s the problem with radically overstating the prevalence of rape? It rationalizes indifference toward men and boys who are falsely accused of rape. Indeed, it sometimes rationalizes false rape accusations themselves.

TIME magazine reports of a college senior named Ginny who says “If a woman did falsely accuse a man of rape, she may have had reasons to. Maybe she wasn’t raped, but he clearly violated her in some way.” And in the same article assistant dean of students Catherine Comins says of male students who are falsely accused of rape, ”They have a lot of pain, but it is not a pain that I would necessarily have spared them. I think it ideally initiates a process of self-exploration. ‘How do I see women?’ ‘If I didn’t violate her, could I have?’ ‘Do I have the potential to do to her what they say I did?’ Those are good questions.”

Similarly, Sophomore Emily Lloyd at Oberlin College says of male students who are falsely accused of rape “so many women get their lives totally ruined by being assaulted and not saying anything. So if one guy gets his life ruined, maybe it balances out.”

Can you imagine what would happen if students and administrators advocated that women deserve to be raped as some kind of “payback” for false rape accusations, or as a means to “walk a mile in men’s shoes”? It would be unthinkable. But under today’s climate of rape hysteria, these things are rationalized.

The problem with this guide? Any woman who believes it actually tells the truth about consent will be more likely to make a false accusation of rape. This is not a nuanced guide that provides a holistic interpretation of consent, weighed and balanced against a variety of factors. It is a political Feminist document, seeking to do little more than broaden the definition of a crime to snag as many men as possible – both innocent and guilty – in a web of destruction.

As is often the case when it comes to Feminism, those most in need of re-education are the re-educators themselves.

http://www.avoiceformalestudents.co...de-peddles-false-rape-apologia-rape-hysteria/


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

"I've found a man now to do some mansplaining on my behalf. " That's right tommy, you have to have someone speak for you, because you can't speak for yourself. Too bad about that isn't it?

Here tommy, remember when you said that Florida State University had so few rapes reported well it turns out that they just don't anything when a rape is reported and that might be why so few are reported. Maybe you can read this article tommy, maybe this is the real problem in America today and it isn't women who aren't raped reporting a consensual sexual encounter as rape maybe it is cops who when a rape is reported do nothing and the evidence disappears and then two years later nothing is ever done about it. Maybe that is the problem. Since you like to read so much maybe you can read this short little investigation by The New York Times. Good luck with that tommy, sorry that while you thought I was gone I was reading. Enjoy rape apologist!

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...tions-against-fsu-jamies-winston.html?hp&_r=0
 
Looks like MF has finally gone to bed or maybe he is boning up on Dworkin before retiring for the night?

Poor tommy, are you going to melt down now or are you going to wait a little longer. Don't you have some global warming is a hoax posts to make today. And don't forget the diary and the laundry. A washer woman such as yourself always has lots of laundry to do. And the book, the book.

One other thing tommy, you have no idea when I go to bed either or what my sleeping habits are. So stfu rape apologist. Everything you claim about me is wrong.
 
Major logical fallacy here Tom. By proxy, and according to your reference if I was to get wasted and someone was to beat the hell out of me and rob me then it's my fault cause I'm drunk? That's a masked man fallacy. In the actions listed by the author while drunk all the action, except the sexual assault, all were criminal acts for which a person should rightfully be prosecuted but in the case of an incapacitated woman being raped, she is the victim of a crime and not the perpetrator. The authors argument completely falls apart on that point.

I don't think that anybody disagrees that attempting to have sex with a drunken unconscious woman is a very bad thing, who said anything different? I suggest that you read this article as it says it all in my opinion. Gender feminists are attempting to redefine the definition of rape all the time, to the point where if a woman isn't stone cold sober then that is potentially rape.

http://www.cotwa.info/2014/01/cathy-young-white-house-overreaches-on.html
 
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

"I've found a man now to do some mansplaining on my behalf. " That's right tommy, you have to have someone speak for you, because you can't speak for yourself. Too bad about that isn't it?

Here tommy, remember when you said that Florida State University had so few rapes reported well it turns out that they just don't anything when a rape is reported and that might be why so few are reported. Maybe you can read this article tommy, maybe this is the real problem in America today and it isn't women who aren't raped reporting a consensual sexual encounter as rape maybe it is cops who when a rape is reported do nothing and the evidence disappears and then two years later nothing is ever done about it. Maybe that is the problem. Since you like to read so much maybe you can read this short little investigation by The New York Times. Good luck with that tommy, sorry that while you thought I was gone I was reading. Enjoy rape apologist!

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...tions-against-fsu-jamies-winston.html?hp&_r=0

Can't be bothered, going swimming now!!
 
I don't think that anybody disagrees that attempting to have sex with a drunken unconscious woman is a very bad thing, who said anything different? I suggest that you read this article as it says it all in my opinion. Gender feminists are attempting to redefine the definition of rape all the time, to the point where if a woman isn't stone cold sober then that is potentially rape.

http://www.cotwa.info/2014/01/cathy-young-white-house-overreaches-on.html

Yes, how dare those dirty "Gender feminists" suggest that a woman should be able to say "no" to a man. Who they hell are they kidding? No man should ever have to ever listen to a woman tell him no. It is the man's right to his woman's body anytime he wants it! No man, do you hear my tommy, no man should ever have to be subjected to the "N" word!
 
Yes tommy, those dirty, nasty "Gender feminists" are redefining rape in fact one of them, Estelle B. Freedman, has written a book on it, which I am currently reading called not surprisingly, Redefining Rape: Sexual Violence in the Era of Suffrage and Segregation. How dare she or any woman write the history of the definition of rape. Leave that to the people who create the OED. It shows that as I said earlier and the man from Queen vigorously disputed that at one point rape in the south was basically defined as a black man having sex with a white woman. But as time went on it gradually became defined as something forcible rather something racial and then soon it was a white man forcing a black woman to have sex against her will. But that was really late, not until the 50s and 60s was a white man convicted of such a crime in the South. And then by the 70s a black woman was actually found innocent of the killing of a white jail guard in a case that garnered national attention, because he tried to rape her in her jail cell. It is a quite famous case. Since you are often telling other people to do their research, tommy, I am sure you will find it if you search for it!
 
Here is a non hysterical video from over here, describing how the current feminist movement came about in the 60s and 70s. Born from academia, hard left Marxist lecturers and students, Dantes is a classic example of the type. Although they deemed to speak for the oppressed masses they were only really concerned about themselves and their own often shitty experiences and misandry.

 
Yes tommy, those dirty, nasty "Gender feminists" are redefining rape in fact one of them, Estelle B. Freedman, has written a book on it, which I am currently reading called not surprisingly, Redefining Rape: Sexual Violence in the Era of Suffrage and Segregation. How dare she or any woman write the history of the definition of rape. Leave that to the people who create the OED. It shows that as I said earlier and the man from Queen vigorously disputed that at one point rape in the south was basically defined as a black man having sex with a white woman. But as time went on it gradually became defined as something forcible rather something racial and then soon it was a white man forcing a black woman to have sex against her will. But that was really late, not until the 50s and 60s was a white man convicted of such a crime in the South. And then by the 70s a black woman was actually found innocent of the killing of a white jail guard in a case that garnered national attention, because he tried to rape her in her jail cell. It is a quite famous case. Since you are often telling other people to do their research, tommy, I am sure you will find it if you search for it!

Sorry I won't waste my time reading some boring old tome by yet another radical lesbian women's studies professor. I recommend this book by a real genius.

http://www.listmuse.com/book.php?book_id=975
 
Yes but what about the situation which I suspect happens a lot where a woman and a man are both drunk, have sex and then, for various reasons, she regrets it and cries rape. Those reasons can include embarrassment, guilt, shame or even revulsion.

If you're embarrassed, guilty, or ashamed, why would you go out of your way to make it public? The usual problem is with women too ashamed to go to the police at all, I don't see how you think shame would drive them directly there.
 
Give me a break. The entire culture in America is wrapped around women being objectified. When a woman then chooses to dress in a sexually provocative way she's gonna get sexually charged interest. My point was/is that for her to be upset with that reaction is BS!

Don't go to the beach, it seems you lack self control, as you must think most men do and that is a shame, most men seem to be able to control their impulses, but you seem to have trouble in that area.
 
This is not to be an answer to rape but to determine whether or not there is some partial responsibility. I live in Los Angeles where it is known as the epicenter and originator of Bloods and Crips. If I know that these particular gangs operate based on colors and MLB hat logos yet I continue to wear opposing colors (along with the signature hats) and I'm accosted, who is responsible?

The people who accosted you.
 
It is a shared responsibility.
Them for using what someone is wearing, as an excuse for targeting them.
You if you're wearing it with the knowledge that you're putting yourself at peril.

If someone waves a loaded gun at a police officer and gets shot, who's to blame?

Women have a right to be in public with attractive clothing on, you do not have a right to wave a loaded gun at a police officer.
 
Really, so both parties are drunk, sex happens without any coercion yet you say that the man is the only one culpable and responsible for their actions.

How do you know that the sex happened without any coercion? The usual problem in these cases is a lack of non-circumstantial evidence - if someone holds them down and forces them to have sex, it doesn't necessarily look that much different than voluntary rough sex. But, the fact of the matter is, a man is stronger than a women in 99% of cases, and can easily overpower them. If rape did occur, it's almost always going to be the man at fault, unless there was a gun or some other weapon involved, or the woman is some sort of body builder. Male rape is almost always male-on-male for this reason. The man could almost always just easily push the woman off, whereas the woman can't do so herself.
 
How do you know that the sex happened without any coercion? The usual problem in these cases is a lack of non-circumstantial evidence - if someone holds them down and forces them to have sex, it doesn't necessarily look that much different than voluntary rough sex. But, the fact of the matter is, a man is stronger than a women in 99% of cases, and can easily overpower them. If rape did occur, it's almost always going to be the man at fault, unless there was a gun or some other weapon involved, or the woman is some sort of body builder. Male rape is almost always male-on-male for this reason. The man could almost always just easily push the woman off, whereas the woman can't do so herself.

I wasn't talking about sex with coercion or physical force, that is something different. I was talking about sex that the woman later regretted, because of fear of ridicule from her friends, her regular boyfriend finding out, disgust, embarrassment etc. They might discuss it with someone and they will say oh yes that's definitely rape, no doubt about it. In former times the woman would just put it down to experience and determine to not be so bloody foolish as to get tanked up in future. Maybe in the US in the future, or now even, men will have to take a breathalyser with them to ensure that the woman is not over the limit.

Here is a case that highlights exactly that:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...avors-alcohol-teen-alleges-assaulted-her.html
 
I wasn't talking about sex with coercion or physical force, that is something different. I was talking about sex that the woman later regretted, because of fear of ridicule from her friends, her regular boyfriend finding out, disgust, embarrassment etc. They might discuss it with someone and they will say oh yes that's definitely rape, no doubt about it. In former times the woman would just put it down to experience and determine to not be so bloody foolish as to get tanked up in future. Maybe in the US in the future, or now even, men will have to take a breathalyser with them to ensure that the woman is not over the limit.

Here is a case that highlights exactly that:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...avors-alcohol-teen-alleges-assaulted-her.html


That is one mighty fine hair you continue to split in your desperate need to justify rape.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top