• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 09:12
CEST 15:12
KST 22:12
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall10HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation5$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced4Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles6[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China9Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL66
StarCraft 2
General
TL Team Map Contest #4: Winners Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
i aint gon lie to u bruh... ASL20 Preliminary Maps [G] Progamer Settings BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall
Tourneys
[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET CSL Xiamen International Invitational The Casual Games of the Week Thread
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Positive Thoughts on Setting Up a Dual-Caliber FX
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 615 users

What is Rape? - Page 17

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 15 16 17 18 19 56 Next
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:12:10
August 23 2012 18:09 GMT
#321
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:29 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:26 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

It appears I've somehow made you mad. At no point have I said men have more to lose from being raped or anything like that. I simply said, female to male rape is more common than you think, according to wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_gender):
[quote]

That's all I've said.
[quote]

I have not denied the quoted fact. I have said however, that a larger proportion of women report being raped by a man than men report being raped by a woman.

NO!
YOU SAID:
It's still a much larger proportion of rapes that are reported though. All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

which has 2 points. both of which are wrong!


No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

According to the Stern Review, the victim is male in around 8% of all recorded rape cases. The unrecorded figure is thought to be far higher.


The proportion of men who go on to report sexual assault is extremely low and the number of victims greater than the government or media coverage would suggest.


The British Crime Survey 2001/2 reported that while 4.2% of women and 4.2% of men said they had been victims of domestic violence in the past year, only 19% of men went on to report it compared with 81% of women.


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:29 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:26 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

It appears I've somehow made you mad. At no point have I said men have more to lose from being raped or anything like that. I simply said, female to male rape is more common than you think, according to wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_gender):
[quote]

That's all I've said.
[quote]

I have not denied the quoted fact. I have said however, that a larger proportion of women report being raped by a man than men report being raped by a woman.

NO!
YOU SAID:
It's still a much larger proportion of rapes that are reported though. All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

which has 2 points. both of which are wrong!


No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

According to the Stern Review, the victim is male in around 8% of all recorded rape cases. The unrecorded figure is thought to be far higher.


The proportion of men who go on to report sexual assault is extremely low and the number of victims greater than the government or media coverage would suggest.


The British Crime Survey 2001/2 reported that while 4.2% of women and 4.2% of men said they had been victims of domestic violence in the past year, only 19% of men went on to report it compared with 81% of women.


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up from you is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when in reality, some of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42555 Posts
August 23 2012 18:09 GMT
#322
On August 24 2012 03:08 Blurry wrote:


Show nested quote +
Man: Hello, I'd like to report a mugging.

Officer: A mugging, eh? Where did it take place?

Man: I was walking by 21st and Dundritch Street and a man pulled out a gun and said, "Give me all your money."

Officer: And did you?

Man: Yes, I co-operated.

Officer: So you willingly gave the man your money without fighting back, calling for help or trying to escape?

Man: Well, yes, but I was terrified. I thought he was going to kill me!

Officer: Mmm. But you did co-operate with him. And I've been informed that you're quite a philanthropist, too.

Man: I give to charity, yes.

Officer: So you like to give money away. You make a habit of giving money away.

Man: What does that have to do with this situation?

Officer: You knowingly walked down Dundritch Street in your suit when everyone knows you like to give away money, and then you didn't fight back. It sounds like you gave money to someone, but now you're having after-donation regret. Tell me, do you really want to ruin his life because of your mistake?

Man: This is ridiculous!

Officer: This is a rape analogy. This is what women face every single day when they try to bring their rapists to justice.


This is a poor analogy because holding someone up at knife point is illegal no matter the circumstances. There are some rare instances where sex is not rape.

You missed the point of the analogy. Giving away money isn't always mugging in the same way that sex isn't always rape. Sex is compared with giving away money, force is compared with force. The knife isn't compared with sex.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42555 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:15:45
August 23 2012 18:12 GMT
#323
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:29 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]
NO!
YOU SAID: [quote]
which has 2 points. both of which are wrong!


No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

According to the Stern Review, the victim is male in around 8% of all recorded rape cases. The unrecorded figure is thought to be far higher.


The proportion of men who go on to report sexual assault is extremely low and the number of victims greater than the government or media coverage would suggest.


The British Crime Survey 2001/2 reported that while 4.2% of women and 4.2% of men said they had been victims of domestic violence in the past year, only 19% of men went on to report it compared with 81% of women.


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:29 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]
NO!
YOU SAID: [quote]
which has 2 points. both of which are wrong!


No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

According to the Stern Review, the victim is male in around 8% of all recorded rape cases. The unrecorded figure is thought to be far higher.


The proportion of men who go on to report sexual assault is extremely low and the number of victims greater than the government or media coverage would suggest.


The British Crime Survey 2001/2 reported that while 4.2% of women and 4.2% of men said they had been victims of domestic violence in the past year, only 19% of men went on to report it compared with 81% of women.


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night?

Consent works by the woman choosing to either affirm her consent to sex or refuse her consent to sex. She doesn't enter a promiscuity rating along with her sluttiness quota and the sexiness of her outfit into the consent-o-meter and then say yes or no based upon some arcane formula.

The argument is based upon the premise that a woman who is promiscuous is more likely to make a false rape report. There is no evidence to this. I could equally argue (and with more logic behind it) that a woman who is promiscuous is more likely to be familiar with how consent works (you say yes if you do want sex and no if you don't want sex) than a woman who is new to it and may be rusty with exactly how the mechanics of consent work.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
NewbieOne
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
Poland560 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:31:53
August 23 2012 18:14 GMT
#324
In Poland, Article 197 of the Criminal Code starts like follows:

Who by force, wrongful threat or deceit, leads another into sexual intercourse...

Separate articles deal with lesser sexual acts, abuse of a position of authority, abuse of helplessness of the victim etc.

As a criminal lawyer (by education at least) I've got to say you need to see the entire context, i.e. if according to the definition in the penal laws of some country something is not actually rape, it doesn't yet follow that such a behaviour is not a crime. It may be called something else than rape. Basically a different type of crime but still a crime. Even perhaps with a hefty penalty attached to it but a different type of crime, different name of it, different word.

For the record, I believe that defining "sexual coercion" as something separate from rape, like some countries do, is idiotic. By definition, sexual coercion is rape. (Except rape could perhaps happen by fraud, like in the Polish Code's definition.) Abuse of some relationships of power or the victim's unfavourable position (economic, social or otherwise) could perhaps make it less than rape, I guess, so some people could wish to define it as a separate, lesser crime, but IMHO it's just simply rape (just perhaps a less culpable case and thus a lesser penalty would be proper than in a case of rape that involves using physical force to overpower the victim).

Another thing I dislike is applying a civil law definition of consent to rape and going on to say that whenever such consent is lacking, the conduct is criminal rape. Criminal law operates on different premises and it needs to focus on the presence or absence of mens rea (intent, which involves knowing what you do and willing to do it), not some intricacies of civil law theory of contractual consent, like if consent somehow manages to be void then there's supposedly a crime there. The crime of rape should be defined basing on the offender's intent to overcome the victim's opposition or not giving the victim a chance to oppose.

To develop on the above, a crime happens as a result of the intent (mind frame) of the offender, not of the victim. For example, just because I feel stolen from doesn't make the other guy a thief. What matters is whether he did the deed or not, and whether he intended it (where error, e.g. mistaken belief of consent on my part, makes his conduct non-criminal). Some people just forget this and think that lack of some perfect consent internally in the alleged victim's mind supposedly makes rape. It does not, that'd be wrong methodology. Civil law and criminal law have different methodology, e.g. there could still be a corresponding tort where requirements for a crime are not met. Somebody just being an idiot could commit that tort (and be liable to pay large damages) without actually committing the crime.

Also, like with any crime, if a number of people apparently can't agree if consent was there or not, if the conduct falls under the definition or not etc., then that's already fuzzy enough to put the possibility of assigning criminal guilt into question, as a criminal defendant is always entitled to the benefit of doubt (reasonable doubt). Rape is one crime where it's very easy for people to forget the principle of reasonable doubt perhaps due to how they empathise with the alleged victim, especially if that victim is female and the alleged offender is male (probably not so the other way round). Per se, reasonable doubt actually has nothing to do with the definition of rape (which is a matter of substantive criminal law, not procedure) but with the procedure of proving it (which is procedural criminal law) but in practice the two areas (i.e. definition of a crimine and the aspects of proving it in court) frequently get confused, intermingle etc. and mess results from that.

Another piece of dubious lawmaking or lawyering technique is the whole "reasonable belief of consent" stuff. Any crime whatsoever requires intent (unless actually defined specifically as a crime that does not require intent, which is a dubious practice and IMHO no lawmaker should define intent-less crimes) and factual error undermines intent, which means it undermines the entire allegation of crime (the prosecutor's case, from the procedural point of view). There don't need to be specific defences defined for specific individual crimes in this matter. This only shows how confused people and even lawyers are with regard to rape.

Also, I wouldn't necessarily be against defining a crime that consisted in failing to ascertain the other party's consent in some stupid and debatable cases (e.g. both drunk, both having sex from time to time previously, one of them too drunk to form valid consent but not resisting) but it shouldn't fall under the traditional definitions of rape.

(Disclaimer: If you think I'm condoning any form of sexual violence or aggression, read again. Just in case someone misunderstands me.)
NicolBolas
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
United States1388 Posts
August 23 2012 18:14 GMT
#325
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:29 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:26 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

It appears I've somehow made you mad. At no point have I said men have more to lose from being raped or anything like that. I simply said, female to male rape is more common than you think, according to wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_gender):
[quote]

That's all I've said.
[quote]

I have not denied the quoted fact. I have said however, that a larger proportion of women report being raped by a man than men report being raped by a woman.

NO!
YOU SAID:
It's still a much larger proportion of rapes that are reported though. All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

which has 2 points. both of which are wrong!


No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

According to the Stern Review, the victim is male in around 8% of all recorded rape cases. The unrecorded figure is thought to be far higher.


The proportion of men who go on to report sexual assault is extremely low and the number of victims greater than the government or media coverage would suggest.


The British Crime Survey 2001/2 reported that while 4.2% of women and 4.2% of men said they had been victims of domestic violence in the past year, only 19% of men went on to report it compared with 81% of women.


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.


... I don't entirely agree with this. Or at least, not the last bit.

The problem with prosecuting rape (when it isn't obvious that rape has occurred. No physical evidence of an attack and so forth) is that it's an act that often happens behind closed doors. Which means that only two people likely witnessed it: the alleged, and the alleger.

The principle of reasonable doubt means that someone alleging that you have commited a crime cannot be sufficient evidence for a conviction. The whole thing comes down to how credible the only witness to the act is. And to deny the defense the ability to attack the credibility of the witness is... disconcerting from a standpoint of finding justice.

In seeking to punish rapists, we also need to make sure that we do so via just methods. Just as for any other crime. And the principle of reasonable doubt ultimately means that we will acquit people who have committed crimes, because we believe that this is preferable to punishing the innocent.

Yeah, it sucks. But the alternative is worse.
So you know, cats are interesting. They are kind of like girls. If they come up and talk to you, it's great. But if you try to talk to them, it doesn't always go so well. - Shigeru Miyamoto
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:18:40
August 23 2012 18:16 GMT
#326
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:29 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]
NO!
YOU SAID: [quote]
which has 2 points. both of which are wrong!


No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

According to the Stern Review, the victim is male in around 8% of all recorded rape cases. The unrecorded figure is thought to be far higher.


The proportion of men who go on to report sexual assault is extremely low and the number of victims greater than the government or media coverage would suggest.


The British Crime Survey 2001/2 reported that while 4.2% of women and 4.2% of men said they had been victims of domestic violence in the past year, only 19% of men went on to report it compared with 81% of women.


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:29 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]
NO!
YOU SAID: [quote]
which has 2 points. both of which are wrong!


No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

According to the Stern Review, the victim is male in around 8% of all recorded rape cases. The unrecorded figure is thought to be far higher.


The proportion of men who go on to report sexual assault is extremely low and the number of victims greater than the government or media coverage would suggest.


The British Crime Survey 2001/2 reported that while 4.2% of women and 4.2% of men said they had been victims of domestic violence in the past year, only 19% of men went on to report it compared with 81% of women.


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.


Actually no. Rape cases rarely have innocent rapists, because there's such a low prosecution rate. There are few cases that are reported, those that are reported are rarely prosecuted unless they have a powerful case, and those that are prosecuted are rarely convicted. This is despite the fact that false accusations of rape are exceedingly rare and even more rarely go to court. So to pretend that alleged rapists are frequently innocent is incorrect.

The fact is that the law right now is exceptionally impotent when comes to convicting rapists, even serial rapists. To pretend that rapists actually get punished by the law right now is laughable and inaccurate. This is not just because the law itself is impotent, but also because Judges and Juries are participants in rape culture and don't understand consent rules. There is frequently physical evidence and collaboration that should put the rapist in prison, but because the rapist made an "innocent mistake" or something they go free.

That's the way it works right now, believe it or not.
Riedell VII
Profile Joined February 2012
United States12 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:21:05
August 23 2012 18:16 GMT
#327
On August 24 2012 02:09 Blurry wrote:
I've really never understood the notion of a rape culture. I don't think rape is okay, nobody I know thinks rape is okay. While walking down a dark alley at 2 in the morning does in fact raise your chances of getting raped, and it is stupid of someone to do that, does not mean that the rapist is absolved of all guilt, or any, its still wrong.


Here's a post that covers a bunch of studies that were done on the topic of thinking rape is okay:

http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/meet-the-predators/

You don't have to read it now. None of you do. But skim it real quick, come back to it later, maybe read a couple more paragraphs. Maybe the findings and implications of the studies covered there will sink in one day, but I think some of you are a lost cause. The rest of you will probably be appropriately horrified.

Also, I want to reiterate something. You guys keep talking about/bringing up "walking down a dark alley" as some kind of really common situation in which people get raped. These rapes, "stranger rapes," account for less than 20% of all reported rapes, with the remaining 80% or so being rapes committed by someone the victim knew.
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
August 23 2012 18:16 GMT
#328
On August 24 2012 03:12 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night.

Do you have any evidence of the contrary though?

Consent works by the woman choosing to either affirm her consent to sex or refuse her consent to sex. She doesn't enter a promiscuity rating along with her sluttiness quota and the sexiness of her outfit into the consent-o-meter and then say yes or no based upon some arcane formula.

How do you get to suggest that more men should be prosecuted because of your feeling about a potential lack of correlation between promiscuity and sex-related lawsuits?

There are innocent men in jail you know, right now.
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
BruceLee6783
Profile Joined March 2007
United States196 Posts
August 23 2012 18:17 GMT
#329
This has been brought up previously in the thread, but I feel I must comment.

It's always the perps fault for committing the crime, ofc.

OTOH, I think it's a bad idea to walk down a dark alley alone (male or female).
I think it's a bad idea to own valuable things and not lock them up.
I think it's a bad idea to do things that make yourself more likely to be targeted by criminals. This can include dressing slutty and flashing your money around.


"No means no" - Yep. Fine with this. Just don't ever tell me no when you mean yes, because I just can't take that chance anymore sweetheart.
You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something.
ComaDose
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
Canada10357 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:20:59
August 23 2012 18:18 GMT
#330
On August 24 2012 03:16 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:12 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]

you actually willing to admit you said [quote]
and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]

you actually willing to admit you said [quote]
and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night.

Do you have any evidence of the contrary though?

Show nested quote +
Consent works by the woman choosing to either affirm her consent to sex or refuse her consent to sex. She doesn't enter a promiscuity rating along with her sluttiness quota and the sexiness of her outfit into the consent-o-meter and then say yes or no based upon some arcane formula.

How do you get to suggest that more men should be prosecuted because of your feeling about a potential lack of correlation between promiscuity and sex-related lawsuits?

There are innocent men in jail you know, right now.


its not suggesting more men should be prosecuted its suggesting rapists should be prosecuted.
EDIT: becuase of judges and large parts of jurries holding the same beliefs you have, the claim is approched with skeptisism instead of neutral justice. i.e. rape culture.
BW pros training sc2 is like kiss making a dub step album.
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
August 23 2012 18:20 GMT
#331
On August 24 2012 03:16 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.


Actually no. Rape cases rarely have innocent rapists, because there's such a low prosecution rate. There are few cases that are reported, those that are reported are rarely prosecuted unless they have a powerful case, and those that are prosecuted are rarely convicted. This is despite the fact that false accusations of rape are exceedingly rare and rarely go to court. So to pretend that alleged rapists are frequently innocent is incorrect.

The fact is that the law right now is exceptionally impotent when comes to convicting rapists, even serial rapists. To pretend that rapists actually get punished by the law right now is laughable and inaccurate. This is not just because the law itself is impotent, but also because Judges and Juries are participants in rape culture and don't understand consent rules.

I think you feel that way because you're gullible and illusioned about the way the justice system works. Rapes are exceptionally hard to prosecute because of how hard it is to figure out if there was consent or not.

And your claim that you possess sufficient knowledge to actually have an idea of how many rape cases are actually rape and not frivolous lawsuits is what's actually "laughable".

You know better than the judges. Yeah right.
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
August 23 2012 18:20 GMT
#332
On August 24 2012 03:12 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night?

Consent works by the woman choosing to either affirm her consent to sex or refuse her consent to sex. She doesn't enter a promiscuity rating along with her sluttiness quota and the sexiness of her outfit into the consent-o-meter and then say yes or no based upon some arcane formula.

The argument is based upon the premise that a woman who is promiscuous is more likely to make a false rape report. There is no evidence to this. I could equally argue (and with more logic behind it) that a woman who is promiscuous is more likely to be familiar with how consent works (you say yes if you do want sex and no if you don't want sex) than a woman who is new to it and may be rusty with exactly how the mechanics of consent work.

Ok, so let us imagine that a case is brought before an American court in which a woman alleges rape against a man she knows. In the woman's past is a history of casual sex, substance abuse, and domestic violence. In the man's past is a relatively sterling record of 0 criminal activity, a "normal" sex life, and no indication that he is prone to dishonesty. Suppose that the man is innocent, how is a defense to go about formulating their case?
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
NicolBolas
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
United States1388 Posts
August 23 2012 18:20 GMT
#333
On August 24 2012 03:16 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:38 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

No. You may be misunderstanding me. I'm saying a larger % of female rape victims report their rape than the % of male rape victims.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]


you actually willing to admit you said
All I'm saying is that in terms of being taken seriously, women have nothing to complain about compared to males.

and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.


Actually no. Rape cases rarely have innocent rapists, because there's such a low prosecution rate. There are few cases that are reported, those that are reported are rarely prosecuted unless they have a powerful case, and those that are prosecuted are rarely convicted. This is despite the fact that false accusations of rape are exceedingly rare and rarely go to court. So to pretend that alleged rapists are frequently innocent is incorrect.


That's not how the justice system works; at least, not in the US. Assumign that the defendant is guilty simply because they're the defendant is contrary to the principle of reasonable doubt. It's against the Constitution.

The burden of proof is always on the prosecution. You cannot assume that the defendant is guilty.
So you know, cats are interesting. They are kind of like girls. If they come up and talk to you, it's great. But if you try to talk to them, it doesn't always go so well. - Shigeru Miyamoto
Crushinator
Profile Joined August 2011
Netherlands2138 Posts
August 23 2012 18:21 GMT
#334
On August 24 2012 03:16 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:12 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]

you actually willing to admit you said [quote]
and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]

you actually willing to admit you said [quote]
and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night.

Do you have any evidence of the contrary though?


Burden of proof. When you can't demonstrate that something is relevant, it should be deemed irrelevant.
Ludwigvan
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Germany2371 Posts
August 23 2012 18:21 GMT
#335
On August 23 2012 23:17 mcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 23 2012 21:57 Ludwigvan wrote:
On August 23 2012 21:55 mcc wrote:
On August 23 2012 21:39 Ludwigvan wrote:
On August 23 2012 21:25 Grumbels wrote:
Some people think that if you get a girl drunk and then take her home and have sex with her when she passes out then it's not rape. Or if she agrees to kissing and touching before. Or if she was flirting with you. Or if she agreed to sex before, but not this time. Or if she had an orgasm during being raped (strangely this happens). Or if she gets pregnant after rape. Or if she is not emotionally broken afterwards. Or if she didn't struggle against the rapist during the rape. Or if she was wearing seductive/revealing clothing. Or if she was "asking for it". Or if she agreed to go to some party and "should have known" what would happen.

No person with good intentions needs ever worry about accidentally raping a girl, that's just ridiculous. This does not mean that all forms of rape have equal consequences, are equally destructive and equally horrible. But they are all bad and that should be the first step. There is no difference between rape and 'rape-rape' and legitimate rape is a ridiculous combination of words.

I don't agree. I am 6 feet and 3 inches and sarcastic. Is it easy for me to see if someone is scared of me? No. Do people tell me if they don't agree? No, they are often afraid, if they see me and don't know me. How should I know, if nobody tells me? It's something that I learned over a long period thinking about how people see me. The intention alone is really not always enough. In my case it is a lot of experience too. It's just so hard to understand what impression people get of you. I am convinced that it can happen, that you later realize, that you raped a girl. Maybe you misinterpreted her not willing as lust. Not every girl will scream as shit and beat you. Some might think: "I have no chance anyway, so don't defend, just wait until its over."

Well-intentioned is the opposite of good. XD

Then maybe you should explicitly make sure that she actually wants sex instead of relying on your guessing if you have such trouble.

I don't rely on guessing. I ask, if I don't know them. Like Jimmy Carr tells me to. ^^

How then can this "I am convinced that it can happen, that you later realize, that you raped a girl." happen ? Because "having good intentions" as he puts it includes asking when not sure.
I thought about not so well reflected good intentions. But you are right if the intentions include the asking.


So, the thread turned more into something like "What is rape and how should we treat women". So, my post is not at all offtopic. Here it comes:

We are nerds. We don't have sex. We watch porn and wank. Who needs sexual intercourse anyway? It's annoying. You have to go get a girl by drinking. I hate drinking. Fucking disgusting courtship display. Boring as fuck. Yes, once in a while I like a weekend with a woman, but that's enough. Yea, you can find girls over the internet, too. Yes, by boring chats. Oh, how I hate parties. The best parties are those that I can watch a stream of at home, sitting in my pajamas and eating a banana.

On topic: Doug Stanhope doesn't fuck anymore. XD
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:22:57
August 23 2012 18:22 GMT
#336
On August 24 2012 03:18 ComaDose wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:16 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:12 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night.

Do you have any evidence of the contrary though?

Consent works by the woman choosing to either affirm her consent to sex or refuse her consent to sex. She doesn't enter a promiscuity rating along with her sluttiness quota and the sexiness of her outfit into the consent-o-meter and then say yes or no based upon some arcane formula.

How do you get to suggest that more men should be prosecuted because of your feeling about a potential lack of correlation between promiscuity and sex-related lawsuits?

There are innocent men in jail you know, right now.


its not suggesting more men should be prosecuted its suggesting rapists should be prosecuted.

And by restricting the tools that defense attorneys have, you'll also prosecute men. And sure you'll probably prosecute more rapists too.

But you'll also be inflicting a severe blow to the already shaky concept of "innocent until proven guilty".

On August 24 2012 03:21 Crushinator wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:16 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:12 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
[quote]

I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night.

Do you have any evidence of the contrary though?


Burden of proof. When you can't demonstrate that something is relevant, it should be deemed irrelevant.

Circumstantial evidence. Girl is known to have more consensual sex, therefore she's more likely to have consensual sex.
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42555 Posts
August 23 2012 18:22 GMT
#337
On August 24 2012 03:16 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:12 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]

you actually willing to admit you said [quote]
and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]

you actually willing to admit you said [quote]
and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night.

Do you have any evidence of the contrary though?

I don't need evidence to not make an argument in court. A lawyer who is insisting that because a woman has sex that means she's a slut who lies about being raped is making an argument in court. Therefore he needs evidence to back up that conclusion. Except of course that despite it being entirely irrelevant (until relevance is proven) lawyers do use it and juries lap it up because they are fucking retarded.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:25:31
August 23 2012 18:23 GMT
#338
On August 24 2012 03:20 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:16 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]

you actually willing to admit you said [quote]
and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:43 Tao367 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:40 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]

you actually willing to admit you said [quote]
and you standing by it?


I think you have come into a conversation that was already progress, and have taken my comment to mean something without context. We were arguing about the political, social and culultral issues and expectations regarding gender in rape cases at the time. Males face double standards, and almost bullying when getting raped by a woman, whereas the women is "brave" for reporting it. That's why a lower proportion of males report it.

Yes I can admit said that. Why wouldn't I?


From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.


Actually no. Rape cases rarely have innocent rapists, because there's such a low prosecution rate. There are few cases that are reported, those that are reported are rarely prosecuted unless they have a powerful case, and those that are prosecuted are rarely convicted. This is despite the fact that false accusations of rape are exceedingly rare and rarely go to court. So to pretend that alleged rapists are frequently innocent is incorrect.

The fact is that the law right now is exceptionally impotent when comes to convicting rapists, even serial rapists. To pretend that rapists actually get punished by the law right now is laughable and inaccurate. This is not just because the law itself is impotent, but also because Judges and Juries are participants in rape culture and don't understand consent rules.

I think you feel that way because you're gullible and illusioned about the way the justice system works. Rapes are exceptionally hard to prosecute because of how hard it is to figure out if there was consent or not.

And your claim that you possess sufficient knowledge to actually have an idea of how many rape cases are actually rape and not frivolous lawsuits is what's actually "laughable".

You know better than the judges. Yeah right.


No, what I am saying is that even if the rapist says that there is no consent he still can get off. All he has to say is that there was a perception of consent, and he doesn't have to explain anything about ambiguity. The woman has to explain why she was so confusing and odd with the ambiguity with her consent.

What part about this don't you understand???

And the link that I tried to show you has proof, evidence, and statistics on everything I just said, with plenty of footnotes to back it up. So how about you actually try to talk about reality, rather than your perception of it.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42555 Posts
August 23 2012 18:24 GMT
#339
On August 24 2012 03:22 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 03:18 ComaDose wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:16 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:12 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 03:09 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:56 Vega62a wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
[quote]

From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.


Why would a person's sexual history matter in a rape case? It doesn't matter if the woman had had sex with every man in a 3 mile radius; if she said no that night, she said no. Literally the only thing that actually matters is if consent was given, and if she says consent wasn't given, and nobody can prove that it was in fact given, then she wins the case. That's the only way this can work.

Here's the kicker though.

If she SAYS that she said no that night, she may or may not actually have said no. You know that. When the case goes to trial, both sides have to determine whether or not there was consent. The defense's best shot is to suggest that the plaintiff is promiscuous and therefore is more likely to have actually given consent.

Reality: It's impossible to actually know if rape actually has happened or if she's pretending that it was rape. "Innocent until proven guilty" tries to kick in, that's it.

On August 24 2012 02:58 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:52 Djzapz wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:48 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 02:42 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
On August 24 2012 01:49 Crushinator wrote:
[quote]

From Wikipedia: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.

I know its been constantly been brought up that females raping males is a real problem, but I have some genuine difficulty percieving it as a problem anywhere close in magnitude to male-to-female rape


My argument to that would be that Drunk driving kills more people than terrorism ever has (or will) but both should be effectively dealt with. I don't think magnitude should negate responsibility. For instance, that number is so large becasue how many men are going to say "I got so drunk last night that this girl asked me for sex and I don't even remember what happened" and go to court over rape charges?

The number is skewed because of the culture we live in, "rape culture" might exist but so does a culture begging for equality while negating its fundamental principle by not creating equal rights and teaching the same values.

Do I think rape is wrong? Fuck yah, I also believe some rape victims were stupid in the way they presented themselves (walking down a dark alley at 2 am) the worlds a bad place but is it their fault? Technically no, I'd never say she should not get justice but she was an idiot for doing that just like I would not feel as bad if a multi million dollar man went into the same dark alley and got mugged.

So T.T you can call me a rape culture participator if that means that I can see some blame in the victims for how they present themselves or where they go. Bad people are everywhere, it's best to start acknowledging that fact and protecting yourself to it. I guess my stance is highly reflective of my high school chemistry teacher who was talking about a girl named Amber Kirwan who was raped and murdered near my house actually after a night at a club called Dooly's. He went on to say that if it was his child he would have tortured the rapist alive but felt guilty that he never taught his daughter how to protect herself in public as this girl was taken when walking down a dark alley piss loaded, he went on to allude that it was partially her fault in placing herself into the position and warned everyone in class to start taking life more seriously.

Have you ever wondered why lawyers drag the sexual history of rape victims into court or bring up what they were wearing etc, even though none of that has any relevance to whether or not consent was given? It's because people like you buy into this "she didn't take appropriate steps to stop herself getting raped" bullshit and then rapists who don't even dispute it get found not guilty. Rapists evade justice because lawyers keep doing it because jurors keep accepting it because it is socially acceptable to blame women for allowing rape to happen by going outside. It's absolutely disgusting.

They bring up the sexual history of the ALLEGED rape victim in court as evidence that maybe the person actually gave consent. That's the defense's job, right? To try to prove that the defendant was in fact having sex with a consenting adult?

If it were up to you, I'm guessing all the rape cases would immediately go in the plaintiff's favor regardless of actual events.

No, if it were up to me I wouldn't dispense of trial by jury and simply arrest everyone and send them to prison. What kind of retarded point is that. I guess if it were up to you you'd gas the Jews (for some reason?).

It is a part of the hugely misogynistic system of blaming women for having sex and acting like they shouldn't have it and that those who do have it and enjoy it are sluts. The line of questioning that goes "have you had sex? do you enjoy sex? have you consented to sex in the past? then how are we supposed to believe that you didn't consent to sex this time when you admit to liking sex?" that completely ignores the obvious fact that people can consent to sex some of the time but not all of the time. It's a completely nonsense argument that only carries any weight when the starting assumption is that the recipient thinks all women who have sex are sluts who deserve to be raped.

My point wasn't retarded IMO. Your post basically went against one of a defendant's big defense point, and you called the plaintiff in court a "rape victim" with no mention of the word alleged in any form.

What I'm picking up is that every rape case has a rapist and a rape victim, when a lot of the time the alleged rapist is innocent. That's why the defense is allowed to bring up the alleged victim's history, in order to determine whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that people who are promiscuous are more likely to make a frivolous rape report? Because if not then why would the amount of sex they have in any way impact whether they gave consent that night.

Do you have any evidence of the contrary though?

Consent works by the woman choosing to either affirm her consent to sex or refuse her consent to sex. She doesn't enter a promiscuity rating along with her sluttiness quota and the sexiness of her outfit into the consent-o-meter and then say yes or no based upon some arcane formula.

How do you get to suggest that more men should be prosecuted because of your feeling about a potential lack of correlation between promiscuity and sex-related lawsuits?

There are innocent men in jail you know, right now.


its not suggesting more men should be prosecuted its suggesting rapists should be prosecuted.

And by restricting the tools that defense attorneys have, you'll also prosecute men. And sure you'll probably prosecute more rapists too.

But you'll also be inflicting a severe blow to the already shaky concept of "innocent until proven guilty".

Failing to convict people because of a illogical nonsense argument is not a victory for justice. If they're innocent then find them innocent without bringing up something completely unrelated and then exploiting the idiocy of the jurors.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Tao367
Profile Joined June 2012
United Kingdom324 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-23 18:29:01
August 23 2012 18:25 GMT
#340
Double post, didn't see it was the last post on this page. This post is on the next page.
Prev 1 15 16 17 18 19 56 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 2h 48m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ForJumy 79
StarCraft: Brood War
Shuttle 2179
Bisu 1560
Flash 1505
firebathero 1474
EffOrt 805
actioN 568
Larva 529
Mini 476
Hyuk 396
Snow 290
[ Show more ]
Soulkey 276
Last 216
Zeus 180
ToSsGirL 172
hero 163
Soma 160
soO 157
Hyun 110
TY 106
Pusan 65
sorry 59
sas.Sziky 47
Rush 42
JYJ36
Noble 31
Sacsri 29
JulyZerg 21
GoRush 20
yabsab 19
sSak 18
HiyA 17
Yoon 17
Movie 13
zelot 9
IntoTheRainbow 9
Icarus 6
ivOry 3
GuemChi 0
Dota 2
Gorgc9287
qojqva1577
XcaliburYe237
League of Legends
singsing2279
Counter-Strike
x6flipin404
allub186
chrisJcsgo104
byalli81
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor99
Other Games
tarik_tv35310
gofns16094
B2W.Neo987
shahzam613
DeMusliM478
hiko412
FrodaN236
Fuzer 230
crisheroes196
QueenE34
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick34868
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 12 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• iopq 2
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Nemesis2759
Upcoming Events
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
2h 48m
WardiTV European League
2h 48m
Jumy vs NightPhoenix
Percival vs Nicoract
ArT vs HiGhDrA
MaxPax vs Harstem
Scarlett vs Shameless
SKillous vs uThermal
Replay Cast
10h 48m
RSL Revival
20h 48m
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs Reynor
OSC
23h 48m
Replay Cast
1d 10h
RSL Revival
1d 20h
Classic vs Cure
FEL
2 days
OSC
2 days
RSL Revival
2 days
[ Show More ]
FEL
2 days
FEL
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
RSL Revival
3 days
FEL
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Replay Cast
5 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-07-07
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSL Xiamen Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.