• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 06:23
CEST 12:23
KST 19:23
  • 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
Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 20257Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202576RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18
Community News
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced21BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8
StarCraft 2
General
Greener Farms CBD Gummies: Real Reviews Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 2025 #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time I offer completely free coaching services Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $10,000 live event Esports World Cup 2025 $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced $5,000 WardiTV Summer Championship 2025 WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
[Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced Dewalt's Show Matches in China BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers [G] Mineral Boosting Does 1 second matter in StarCraft?
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
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 UK Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 731 users

What is Rape? - Page 28

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 26 27 28 29 30 56 Next
Body_Shield
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Canada3368 Posts
August 24 2012 00:43 GMT
#541
In the US, Men are the most raped demographic.....due to the prison system...

Rape should not be defined by the sex of the victim or perpetrator, I am very disappointed in some of you
So, five-card stud, nothing wild... and the sky's the limit
Zahir
Profile Joined March 2012
United States947 Posts
August 24 2012 00:50 GMT
#542
On August 24 2012 09:27 mcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:15 Zahir wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law

One quick example of rape laws which only refer to men.

"Rape shield" laws and statutory rape laws in the US often only offer protection to women.

It also seems a commonly held opinion here that in cases where an inebriated man and woman have sex, only the male party is a potential rapist.

These all flow from the belief that only men are even capable of rape and are inherently more evil, while women are more frail and pure. Beliefs dating back to the middle ages if not earlier. Check the Wikipedia article on rape laws if youd dispute this.

Outdated laws which should be fixed. Of course if they are not already de facto fixed by courts extending the purpose of the law in practice.


If that is truly your opinion then we are in agreement. Fix the laws, instruct juries to treat men and women equally. None of this "if you have sex with a drunk chick it's rape". It's either rape for both genders or neither.
What is best? To crush the Zerg, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the Protoss.
ElvisWayCool
Profile Joined March 2010
United States437 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-24 00:52:09
August 24 2012 00:50 GMT
#543
Can't we just say: Don't put your genitals in/on anyone who doesn't want you to. Don't touch anyone anywhere they don't want to be touched. Don't threaten people with violence.

Does that cover all the bases? Seems like if you're doing any of these things anyway, you're in the wrong.

However, if the person doesn't communicate their desires to you, you can't know for sure what they want.

So, maybe make it: (all of those things) + unless they tell you to.

Guilt is in the hands of the victim until they pass it to the other party by explaining their desires. If someone is too intoxicated to do so, they are protected by the law. If someone is unable to do so (eg. asleep), they are protected by the law.

And no call backsies: once you say it's ok, it's ok.


On August 24 2012 09:43 Body_Shield wrote:
Rape should not be defined by the sex of the victim or perpetrator, I am very disappointed in some of you


This. Which I tried to make obvious in my post. Who cares what gender you are? If you don't want to get touched, you shouldn't be touched.
gruff
Profile Joined September 2010
Sweden2276 Posts
August 24 2012 01:00 GMT
#544
On August 24 2012 09:43 Body_Shield wrote:
In the US, Men are the most raped demographic.....due to the prison system...

Rape should not be defined by the sex of the victim or perpetrator, I am very disappointed in some of you

I find that very hard to believe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Prison_population
With those two you should be able to see how unreasonable that statement is. There would have to be an absurd amount of rapes happening in your prisons for that to be true.
BlazeFury01
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States1460 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-24 01:07:01
August 24 2012 01:04 GMT
#545
What is rape? The forcing of sexual actions to one whom is noncompliant. I say "noncompliant" because there are people who enjoy forced sexual actions during intercourse.
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-24 03:18:13
August 24 2012 01:09 GMT
#546
Uhmmm...

A) I'm pretty surprised by how many times people repeated the "what is rape? baby don't hurt me! no more!" line from the 'what is love' song. I think I counted almost 10 separate references to it.

B) I think the simpler the definition we have, the better, so as to avoid confusion and traffic jams in court. From what I understand, the easiest way to define rape is when someone forces someone else to have sex. I think forcing someone else to have sex usually means some physical or violent threat is involved, although I would be open to understand the term outside of scenarios contingent on physical threat/violence. I think if one is intoxicated, and another takes advantage of that fact in order to have sex, then this constitutes something else, but remains rape nonetheless in certain instances. I do think that this particular version involving intoxication is the most difficult to classify, because some cases are more clear than others. For example, if one is unconscious by intoxication, and another proceeds to have sex with that person, it undoubtedly constitutes rape. However, if both are intoxicated, and both begin to have sex, but then one backs out while the other misunderstands, then it becomes less clear. In the end if there is a clear & verbal "no" which is not respected, then it is necessarily rape.

C) I think it makes more sense to restrict it to intercourse, rather than also including oral sex & other sexual acts (someone forcing another to give him oral sex should be considered sexual assault, for example).
BlazeFury01
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States1460 Posts
August 24 2012 01:13 GMT
#547
But see, what I do not get is people trying to say that the female teachers "raped" their male students. Hell, if I was in the students shoes, I would have jumped at the opportunity to have a one on one with the teacher about sexual education.
sunprince
Profile Joined January 2011
United States2258 Posts
August 24 2012 01:13 GMT
#548
On August 24 2012 09:22 NicolBolas wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:15 Zahir wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law

One quick example of rape laws which only refer to men.

"Rape shield" laws and statutory rape laws in the US often only offer protection to women.

It also seems a commonly held opinion here that in cases where an inebriated man and woman have sex, only the male party is a potential rapist.

These all flow from the belief that only men are even capable of rape and are inherently more evil, while women are more frail and pure. Beliefs dating back to the middle ages if not earlier. Check the Wikipedia article on rape laws if youd dispute this.


Funny, I thought it flowed from the fact that men cause far more rapes than women. Also, the Rape Shield thing is similarly due to the fact that juries probably won't hold a man's promiscuous sexual history against him unless it materially affects the case. Whereas promiscuous women are all to frequently considered to have wanted it and later changed their minds.


Rape trials frequently boil down to a he-said, she-said argument. In such an argument, the sexual history of a person may be relevant to determining if there is reasonable doubt as to whether consent was given. In practice, juries are absolutely motivated by prejudicial beliefs on gender norms, but that's an unforunate consequence caused by society, not the legal system.

Rape shield laws, however, address this wrong with a far more heinous wrong, by infringing on a defendant's right to defend themselves via cross examination. A notable example case was the rape trial of Mike Tyson, in which a rape shield law prevented his counsel from introducing evidence that the woman had a history about lying about sexual encounters. Rape shield laws are consequently one of the reasons why there is an unusually high false conviction rate for rapes,. Rape shield laws also display a blatant double standard in that they shield the names of accusers, while failing to similarly protect the accused.

The simple fact of the matter is, rape trials are always going to be problematic because it can be difficult to determine whether there was consent. In the words of Blackstone, however, it's better that ten guilty men escape than that one innocent person suffer. Rape shield laws turn that on it's head by placing the conviction of rapists before protecting the rights of the accused.
NicolBolas
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
United States1388 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-24 01:24:24
August 24 2012 01:15 GMT
#549
On August 24 2012 09:35 Zahir wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:22 NicolBolas wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:15 Zahir wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law

One quick example of rape laws which only refer to men.

"Rape shield" laws and statutory rape laws in the US often only offer protection to women.

It also seems a commonly held opinion here that in cases where an inebriated man and woman have sex, only the male party is a potential rapist.

These all flow from the belief that only men are even capable of rape and are inherently more evil, while women are more frail and pure. Beliefs dating back to the middle ages if not earlier. Check the Wikipedia article on rape laws if youd dispute this.


Funny, I thought it flowed from the fact that men cause far more rapes than women. Also, the Rape Shield thing is similarly due to the fact that juries probably won't hold a man's promiscuous sexual history against him unless it materially affects the case. Whereas promiscuous women are all to frequently considered to have wanted it and later changed their minds.


If I told you the vast majority of money launderers are and historically have been white and showed you an entire legal code which defines money laundering as an act committed by a white dude you would probably not be so happy yes? You would probably be able to draw some negative inferences about the opinions and biases of the people who support bias in law such as that yes?


That's a poor analogy. The law does not protect only women. The various laws offer certain protections for women, but the definition of rape isn't only for when it is against women.

A more accurate analogy would be the use of certain kinds of evidence in money laundering cases. Evidence that has no merit, that the rules of legal procedure should already prevent from being brought up.

Laws exist because of society. Female promiscuity is considered bad by society, while male promiscuity is not. Hence, female rape victims need protection against such accusations. I wouldn't mind seeing it broadened to everyone (since the argument, regardless of society, is fallacious), but I don't see it as a particularly heinous issue.

On August 24 2012 10:13 sunprince wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:22 NicolBolas wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:15 Zahir wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law

One quick example of rape laws which only refer to men.

"Rape shield" laws and statutory rape laws in the US often only offer protection to women.

It also seems a commonly held opinion here that in cases where an inebriated man and woman have sex, only the male party is a potential rapist.

These all flow from the belief that only men are even capable of rape and are inherently more evil, while women are more frail and pure. Beliefs dating back to the middle ages if not earlier. Check the Wikipedia article on rape laws if youd dispute this.


Funny, I thought it flowed from the fact that men cause far more rapes than women. Also, the Rape Shield thing is similarly due to the fact that juries probably won't hold a man's promiscuous sexual history against him unless it materially affects the case. Whereas promiscuous women are all to frequently considered to have wanted it and later changed their minds.


Rape trials frequently boil down to a he-said, she-said argument. In such an argument, the sexual history of a person may be relevant to determining if there is reasonable doubt as to whether consent was given. In practice, juries are absolutely motivated by prejudicial beliefs on gender norms, but that's an unforunate consequence caused by society, not the legal system.


So, a miscarriage of justice due to jury preconceptions is fine, but preventing the introduction of evidence that has nothing to do with the case is bad.

And no, sexual history alone is never relevant to consent. Remember: a rape trial is ultimately about establishing whether there was consent. And consent is a question of honesty; therefore, the only thing that matters is whether the witness is trustworthy. A history of lying can be admissible, but not just sex for its own sake.

On August 24 2012 10:13 sunprince wrote:
Rape shield laws, however, address this wrong with a far more heinous wrong, by infringing on a defendant's right to defend themselves via cross examination. A notable example case was the rape trial of Mike Tyson, in which a rape shield law prevented his counsel from introducing evidence that the woman had a history about lying about sexual encounters. Rape shield laws are consequently one of the reasons why there is an unusually high false conviction rate for rapes,. Rape shield laws also display a blatant double standard in that they shield the names of accusers, while failing to similarly protect the accused.


That's not a double-standard; there is a difference between the accused and the accuser. A "double-standard" only applies when both parties are the same. They are not.

The accused does not have to testify; the accuser does. So shielding the accuser is not bias or a double-standard or anything. It's protecting someone's identity.

On August 24 2012 10:13 sunprince wrote:
The simple fact of the matter is, rape trials are always going to be problematic because it can be difficult to determine whether there was consent. In the words of Blackstone, however, it's better that ten guilty men escape than that one innocent person suffer. Rape shield laws turn that on it's head by placing the conviction of rapists before protecting the rights of the accused.


Nonsense. It places the pursuit of justice before anything else; nothing more. The presentation of "evidence" that exists solely to prejudice the jury is not conducive to finding justice. That's why juries don't get to hear about the legal background of the defendant.
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: 2012-08-24 01:20:13
August 24 2012 01:17 GMT
#550
On August 24 2012 10:00 gruff wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:43 Body_Shield wrote:
In the US, Men are the most raped demographic.....due to the prison system...

Rape should not be defined by the sex of the victim or perpetrator, I am very disappointed in some of you

I find that very hard to believe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Prison_population
With those two you should be able to see how unreasonable that statement is. There would have to be an absurd amount of rapes happening in your prisons for that to be true.


Actually it is true by some recent studies. Prison rape is absolutely rampant in our prison system at the moment. It's ridiculous considering we have prison guards and such. Recently Obama did sign a bill to try to curtail it.



Anyway, prison rape is a different issue from civilian rape (which is overwhelmingly male on female). Prisons are simply not enforcing rape issues in their controlled prisons. In the civilian population, we have rape laws and a culture that is preventing rapists from being brought to justice in alarming numbers.
sunprince
Profile Joined January 2011
United States2258 Posts
August 24 2012 01:20 GMT
#551
On August 24 2012 10:00 gruff wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:43 Body_Shield wrote:
In the US, Men are the most raped demographic.....due to the prison system...

Rape should not be defined by the sex of the victim or perpetrator, I am very disappointed in some of you

I find that very hard to believe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Prison_population
With those two you should be able to see how unreasonable that statement is. There would have to be an absurd amount of rapes happening in your prisons for that to be true.


There actually is an absurd amount of prison rape in the US. The US Department of Justice found that prison rape accounted for the majority of all rapes in the United States in 2008.

And actually, even if you set aside prison rape, there were almost as many male rape victims as female victims in 2010 (even if feminists do their best to define rape as something that only men do to women). The reality is quite different from the "women are victims" narrative you find in the mainstream media.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42655 Posts
August 24 2012 01:22 GMT
#552
On August 24 2012 10:13 sunprince wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:22 NicolBolas wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:15 Zahir wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law

One quick example of rape laws which only refer to men.

"Rape shield" laws and statutory rape laws in the US often only offer protection to women.

It also seems a commonly held opinion here that in cases where an inebriated man and woman have sex, only the male party is a potential rapist.

These all flow from the belief that only men are even capable of rape and are inherently more evil, while women are more frail and pure. Beliefs dating back to the middle ages if not earlier. Check the Wikipedia article on rape laws if youd dispute this.


Funny, I thought it flowed from the fact that men cause far more rapes than women. Also, the Rape Shield thing is similarly due to the fact that juries probably won't hold a man's promiscuous sexual history against him unless it materially affects the case. Whereas promiscuous women are all to frequently considered to have wanted it and later changed their minds.


Rape trials frequently boil down to a he-said, she-said argument. In such an argument, the sexual history of a person may be relevant to determining if there is reasonable doubt as to whether consent was given. In practice, juries are absolutely motivated by prejudicial beliefs on gender norms, but that's an unforunate consequence caused by society, not the legal system.

If the alleged victim of the rape explains that although they have previously had consensual sex they did not, in this case, consent then how exactly is the previous consensual sex relevant to anything? The only possible argument you can then make is that promiscuity is correlated with lying about rape. It is done purely to exploit residual sexism regarding women who leave the kitchen deserving rape.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
sunprince
Profile Joined January 2011
United States2258 Posts
August 24 2012 01:23 GMT
#553
On August 24 2012 10:15 NicolBolas wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:35 Zahir wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:22 NicolBolas wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:15 Zahir wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law

One quick example of rape laws which only refer to men.

"Rape shield" laws and statutory rape laws in the US often only offer protection to women.

It also seems a commonly held opinion here that in cases where an inebriated man and woman have sex, only the male party is a potential rapist.

These all flow from the belief that only men are even capable of rape and are inherently more evil, while women are more frail and pure. Beliefs dating back to the middle ages if not earlier. Check the Wikipedia article on rape laws if youd dispute this.


Funny, I thought it flowed from the fact that men cause far more rapes than women. Also, the Rape Shield thing is similarly due to the fact that juries probably won't hold a man's promiscuous sexual history against him unless it materially affects the case. Whereas promiscuous women are all to frequently considered to have wanted it and later changed their minds.


If I told you the vast majority of money launderers are and historically have been white and showed you an entire legal code which defines money laundering as an act committed by a white dude you would probably not be so happy yes? You would probably be able to draw some negative inferences about the opinions and biases of the people who support bias in law such as that yes?


That's a poor analogy. The law does not protect only women. The various laws offer certain protections for women, but the definition of rape isn't only for when it is against women.


Yeah, but in practice, as well as outside of the law, rape is frequently treated as only a crime committed by men and to women.

On August 24 2012 10:15 NicolBolas wrote:
Laws exist because of society. Female promiscuity is considered bad by society, while male promiscuity is not. Hence, female rape victims need protection against such accusations. I wouldn't mind seeing it broadened to everyone (since the argument, regardless of society, is fallacious), but I don't see it as a particularly heinous issue.


As I explained a few posts above, the argument is not necessarily fallacious. Rape shield laws prevent legitimate evidence from being used in trials. Female rape victims do not need particular protection against such accusations, because the laws of evidence already prohibit fallacious arguments.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42655 Posts
August 24 2012 01:25 GMT
#554
On August 24 2012 10:13 BlazeFury01 wrote:
But see, what I do not get is people trying to say that the female teachers "raped" their male students. Hell, if I was in the students shoes, I would have jumped at the opportunity to have a one on one with the teacher about sexual education.

The consent in sex between a teacher and a student is really murky due to the power and responsibility that the relationship gives one over the other. The fact that you find it hot doesn't change that, it is still wrong.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
August 24 2012 01:27 GMT
#555
On August 24 2012 09:28 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 09:25 mcc wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:22 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:20 mcc wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:01 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:
On August 24 2012 08:56 mcc wrote:
On August 24 2012 08:52 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:
As someone who is unfamiliar with how courts usually deal with these cases, I'd like to ask how do you prove guilt? It's not like you can measure consent.

Similarly like courts measure intent. This is the reason we have judges who are human and thus can understand the situation and are trained to uphold the spirit of the law instead of the letter and also to recognize appeals to emotion, incorrect arguments,... This is of course the reason I dislike juries.

when I say prove guilt, I mean prove guilt. I think you're mistaken prove with agree on

As I said courts also prove guilt in cases where showing intent is necessary and you can measure intent about as well as consent. Of course depends what you mean by "prove". Courts are not in business of logical proofs. Enough evidence is the required proof and what is enough and what is required varies case from case depending on the circumstances.

Sounds like legal terminology is misleading.

Can you actually explain what you mean by that one-liner, I am not a mind-reader.

What's to explain? My statement was pretty clear and straight forward. But please tell me what you are confused about, then I can maybe help you understand.

What legal terminology is misleading to you and in what way ?
sunprince
Profile Joined January 2011
United States2258 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-24 01:30:18
August 24 2012 01:29 GMT
#556
On August 24 2012 10:22 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 10:13 sunprince wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:22 NicolBolas wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:15 Zahir wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law

One quick example of rape laws which only refer to men.

"Rape shield" laws and statutory rape laws in the US often only offer protection to women.

It also seems a commonly held opinion here that in cases where an inebriated man and woman have sex, only the male party is a potential rapist.

These all flow from the belief that only men are even capable of rape and are inherently more evil, while women are more frail and pure. Beliefs dating back to the middle ages if not earlier. Check the Wikipedia article on rape laws if youd dispute this.


Funny, I thought it flowed from the fact that men cause far more rapes than women. Also, the Rape Shield thing is similarly due to the fact that juries probably won't hold a man's promiscuous sexual history against him unless it materially affects the case. Whereas promiscuous women are all to frequently considered to have wanted it and later changed their minds.


Rape trials frequently boil down to a he-said, she-said argument. In such an argument, the sexual history of a person may be relevant to determining if there is reasonable doubt as to whether consent was given. In practice, juries are absolutely motivated by prejudicial beliefs on gender norms, but that's an unforunate consequence caused by society, not the legal system.

If the alleged victim of the rape explains that although they have previously had consensual sex they did not, in this case, consent then how exactly is the previous consensual sex relevant to anything? The only possible argument you can then make is that promiscuity is correlated with lying about rape. It is done purely to exploit residual sexism regarding women who leave the kitchen deserving rape.


It's relevant because previous consensual sex may establish a reasonable belief that consent was implied (and therefore there was no mens rea). You yourself brought up an example in this thread that when consent is typically implied between partners in a sexual relationship unless otherwise communicated. Another example would be the Mike Tyson case I noted in my post, where rape shield laws barred evidence that the woman in question had a history of lying about sexual encounters. There's other examples that exist too, but the point is, a person's past history can create reasonable doubt, which the defendant of any crime is absolutely entitled to using in their defense. And if it isn't relevant, then the laws of evidence already allow the prosecution to object to such an argument.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42655 Posts
August 24 2012 01:29 GMT
#557
Also regarding prison rape, I would classify myself as a feminist and I still find prison rape, and attitudes towards it, utterly abhorrent. Particularly disgusting is the idea that all prisoners deserve to be raped as part of their punishment and that it's something we should turn a blind eye to. I dislike the idea of prison as a method of punishment (rather than reform, protect, deter) and institutionalised rape certainly goes far beyond the kind of punishment the state should be handing out. Something should be done.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Zahir
Profile Joined March 2012
United States947 Posts
August 24 2012 01:30 GMT
#558
"Laws exist because of society. Female promiscuity is considered bad by society, while male promiscuity is not. Hence, female rape victims need protection against such accusations. I wouldn't mind seeing it broadened to everyone (since the argument, regardless of society, is fallacious), but I don't see it as a particularly heinous issue."

Therein lieth my objection, Nikol. Society is tougher on women so it's ok for laws to be tougher on men... I understand where you're coming from but that is not the correct approach to me. Educate society so they can live up to the law, or find ways to remove bias from the judicial process.

There are two ignorant beliefs involved here. One that a woman can somehow "have it coming". Another that women are just too weak and vulnerable to be held to the same standards as men. I simply wish to abolish both.
What is best? To crush the Zerg, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the Protoss.
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
August 24 2012 01:31 GMT
#559
On August 24 2012 10:29 sunprince wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 10:22 KwarK wrote:
On August 24 2012 10:13 sunprince wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:22 NicolBolas wrote:
On August 24 2012 09:15 Zahir wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law

One quick example of rape laws which only refer to men.

"Rape shield" laws and statutory rape laws in the US often only offer protection to women.

It also seems a commonly held opinion here that in cases where an inebriated man and woman have sex, only the male party is a potential rapist.

These all flow from the belief that only men are even capable of rape and are inherently more evil, while women are more frail and pure. Beliefs dating back to the middle ages if not earlier. Check the Wikipedia article on rape laws if youd dispute this.


Funny, I thought it flowed from the fact that men cause far more rapes than women. Also, the Rape Shield thing is similarly due to the fact that juries probably won't hold a man's promiscuous sexual history against him unless it materially affects the case. Whereas promiscuous women are all to frequently considered to have wanted it and later changed their minds.


Rape trials frequently boil down to a he-said, she-said argument. In such an argument, the sexual history of a person may be relevant to determining if there is reasonable doubt as to whether consent was given. In practice, juries are absolutely motivated by prejudicial beliefs on gender norms, but that's an unforunate consequence caused by society, not the legal system.

If the alleged victim of the rape explains that although they have previously had consensual sex they did not, in this case, consent then how exactly is the previous consensual sex relevant to anything? The only possible argument you can then make is that promiscuity is correlated with lying about rape. It is done purely to exploit residual sexism regarding women who leave the kitchen deserving rape.


It's relevant because previous consensual sex may establish a reasonable belief that consent was implied (and therefore there was no mens rea). You yourself brought up an example in this thread that when consent is typically implied between partners in a sexual relationship unless otherwise communicated. Another example would be the Mike Tyson case I noted in my post, where rape shield laws barred evidence that the woman in question had a history of lying about sexual encounters. There's other examples that exist too, but the point is, a person's past history can create reasonable doubt, which the defendant of any crime is absolutely entitled to using in their defense. And if it isn't relevant, then the laws of evidence already allow the prosecution to object to such an argument.


What about evidence that the man has been accused (but not convicted) of rape several times before?
sunprince
Profile Joined January 2011
United States2258 Posts
August 24 2012 01:31 GMT
#560
On August 24 2012 10:25 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 24 2012 10:13 BlazeFury01 wrote:
But see, what I do not get is people trying to say that the female teachers "raped" their male students. Hell, if I was in the students shoes, I would have jumped at the opportunity to have a one on one with the teacher about sexual education.

The consent in sex between a teacher and a student is really murky due to the power and responsibility that the relationship gives one over the other. The fact that you find it hot doesn't change that, it is still wrong.


If the consent is murky, then it should logically follow that the wrongness is also murky. Philosophically and socially, the wrongness should be determined on a case-by-case basis, but of course legally it is not unreasonable to use strict liability.
Prev 1 26 27 28 29 30 56 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
FEL
09:00
Cracow 2025
Krystianer vs sOs
SKillous vs ArT
MaNa vs Elazer
Spirit vs Gerald
Clem vs TBD
uThermal vs TBD
Reynor vs TBD
Lambo vs TBD
RotterdaM938
ComeBackTV 907
IndyStarCraft 397
CranKy Ducklings143
Rex120
3DClanTV 108
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RotterdaM 938
IndyStarCraft 397
Rex 120
ProTech68
StarCraft: Brood War
Horang2 13672
Hyuk 4277
Hyun 919
Barracks 689
firebathero 655
Larva 641
Mini 601
BeSt 382
EffOrt 245
sorry 71
[ Show more ]
ZerO 67
Last 63
Shinee 57
zelot 48
Free 39
scan(afreeca) 35
Noble 33
soO 23
NaDa 20
Soulkey 18
yabsab 12
Sacsri 12
Sharp 9
Movie 8
Bale 6
ajuk12(nOOB) 5
Dota 2
XcaliburYe672
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K933
shoxiejesuss629
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor240
Other Games
gofns12937
Happy492
Beastyqt461
SortOf101
ZerO(Twitch)12
Organizations
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 12 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH318
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2266
Upcoming Events
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3h 37m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
7h 37m
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 23h
WardiTV European League
2 days
Online Event
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
5 days
[ Show More ]
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL 20 Team Wars
FEL Cracov 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
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
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.