Do we live in a rape culture?

[Synobun]

Anything they do they are responsible for. Has done to them is a completely different matter.

A girl is passed out drunk and a guy has sex with her? Rape.
A girl welcomes the sexual advances of a guy and has sex with him? Consensual sex.

Your comparison still has the implication that the girl is not impaired while welcoming that act which is what we keep circling back to. You're operating under the assumption that impairment is a non-factor and thus impairment as a component in determining consent is simply a ruse.

Well, when the woman gets to decide if she was too drunk or not, that does put the power in her hands. I'm not saying the guy will be automatically convicted, but now not only does he have to show that it was consensual, he has to somehow show that she wasn't too drunk. The grey area comes from the question of "what constitutes being too drunk?" It seems to be based on the feelings of the girl after the fact. We can agree to disagree on this if you think that's fair.

The accused in a rape case rarely has to prove anything.

The law also doesn't say women get to decide what is too drunk. The law says that being drunk and not resisting does not constitute as ironclad consent. That seems fair. It ensures that a rapist can't say "well, they didn't resist" as a defense. I'm in favour of that no longer being acceptable even though I've been in a situation where such a defense was my only recourse (socially, not legally). It puts the responsibility of resisting a crime on the victim while distracting from the real problem that someone committed a crime, be it blatant or through a series of unfortunate events. I'm personally uncomfortable with a viewpoint that blames the victim for being a victim.

What? C'mon, that's not even close to what I'm saying.

Why do you think a law that says "not resisting isn't consent" is detrimental to men if it's not because you think the woman should do more to resist being raped?

 

[REDY]

I guess that biology is rape science nowdays.

 

[caketastydelish]

What applies in the animal kingdom doesn't really apply to humans. Or if it did, not in civilized times.

 

[Akka]

The accused in a rape case rarely has to prove anything.

The law also doesn't say women get to decide what is too drunk. The law says that being drunk and not resisting does not constitute as ironclad consent. That seems fair. It ensures that a rapist can't say "well, they didn't resist" as a defense. I'm in favour of that no longer being acceptable even though I've been in a situation where such a defense was my only recourse (socially, not legally). It puts the responsibility of resisting a crime on the victim while distracting from the real problem that someone committed a crime, be it blatant or through a series of unfortunate events. I'm personally uncomfortable with a viewpoint that blames the victim for being a victim.

You DO realize that if the man is innocent, then HE is being the victim, and your whole reasoning becomes self-contradictory ?

 

[Synobun]

You DO realize that if the man is innocent, then HE is being the victim, and your whole reasoning becomes self-contradictory ?

You're wrong.

 

[caketastydelish]

Nah. I think being falsely accused of rape is a pretty crappy thing to happen to a person. On the other hand, it isn't frequent, so we shouldn't have the discussion in the first place.

 

[Akka]

You're wrong.

People falsely accused aren't victims ?
Nice to know.

It's funny how people who are too fanatical in a specific aspect, tend to in the end become exactly what they fight, just reversed - people blinded by "racism" becoming racists, people wanting to fight "oppressive governments" more often than not becoming tyrants themselves if they win, and people obsessed with "victim blaming" ending up blaming victims.

I'm sure there is a lot to learn from this.

Nah. I think being falsely accused of rape is a pretty crappy thing to happen to a person. On the other hand, it isn't frequent, so we shouldn't have the discussion in the first place.

As Manfred pointed, we shouldn't have trans laws and specificities either, after all it's only about a tiny amount of people right ?

 

[Narz]

Nah. I think being falsely accused of rape is a pretty crappy thing to happen to a person. On the other hand, it isn't frequent, so we shouldn't have the discussion in the first place.

What's the conviction rate for those accused of rape?

Accusing someone of sexual violence happens all the time, not always within the crininal justice system (it can be thrown into a divorce or custody case with no evidence necessary and lots of money on the line). Or, it can just be used to destroy someone's reputation.

Shoot a good 50% of our last 4 presidents have been accused of rape (in Trump's case I believe it)

Saying something over and over doesn't make it true. What's your emotional reason for being so insistent?

 

[Synobun]

People falsely accused aren't victims ?
Nice to know.

They aren't victims of rape, no. Their being a victim of a different crime isn't relevant to what's being discussed. If a case has progressed to the point that the accuser is now under suspicion of faking the claim, everything that's being discussed now becomes irrelevant as it's no longer about rape, the question of consent, and whether or not impairment matters. Then it becomes about someone falsely charging another person. Your tirade about fanaticism was nice but ill-placed.

 

[Tahuti]

Rape is illegal. If our culture condones rape why do our laws prohibit it?

Good appearances? The culture normative to making a law does not apply to all cultures existing within the jurisdiction wherein that law applies. Erdogan certainly endorses rape culture, yet not all sections of Turkish culture are part of it.

Rape victims are afforded many special protections that victims of other crimes are not afforded (look up rape shield laws). This seems to suggest that our culture views rape as especially bad, not as something it condones.

This assumes the justice system will identifies rape victims as such without any error. This is not the case. Actual rape victims may be denied these protections if they aren't acknowledged as such. Conversely, trumped (pun intended) up rape charges may give non-victims such protections.

Nobody in their right mind would want to be considered a rapist. If rape was seen as "sexy" wouldn't people brag about being rapists?

Forgive me for sounding callous, though who defines 'right mind' and who defines 'rape' and 'rapist'? In Latin, rapere means as much as stealing, and until relatively recently (like 200 years ago) rape was defined as akin to 'stealing' a woman from her husband or father.

Also, plenty of people - male and female alike - are hybristophiliacs. They might get aroused by the though of encountering rapists.

 

[Spoonwood]

A counterargument stating that you once heard a story about two drunk people having sex and the girl's say-so being taken as gospel while the man gets unceremoniously roasted by his peers won't be accepted.

It is no urban legend that women make the majority of rape accusations that go to a court of law and those accusations get made against men.

Have you ever seen what surveys trying to make rape estimates say about alcohol and rape? For instance, what the CDC says in their NISVS surveys? The percent of alcohol related incidents in comparison to non-alcohol incidents is not all that small. Oh... and in such surveys, we ONLY hear from someone making an accusation or not making an accusation. We do NOT hear from the accused. They don't give a survey to a person, figure out who got accused, and then ask the accused about what they said.

If you intend on claiming that a girl's word is law and the man's equal intoxication is irrelevant, please provide concrete evidence of this

I don't think we have to talk about law in the literal sense of the term, especially with college campuses setting up quasi-legal, star chamber "tribunals". So, that said...

This poster did actually appear on a college campus.

 

[Synobun]

It is no urban legend that women make the majority of rape accusations that go to a court of law and those accusations get made against men.

Have you ever seen what surveys trying to make rape estimates say about alcohol and rape? For instance, what the CDC says in their NISVS surveys? The percent of alcohol related incidents in comparison to non-alcohol incidents is not all that small. Oh... and in such surveys, we ONLY hear from someone making an accusation or not making an accusation. We do NOT hear from the accused. They don't give a survey to a person, figure out who got accused, and then ask the accused about what they said.

I don't see how what you've said is relevant to what I've said. You're welcome to prove that men are being convicted for rape based on a woman's mere say-so.

I don't think we have to talk about law in the literal sense of the term, especially with college campuses setting up quasi-legal, star chamber "tribunals". So, that said...

This poster did actually appear on a college campus.

I'm confident that someone putting up a poster has no real bearing on the actual legal system. Linking me to a Tumblr blog or an obscure wordpress site to make your case would have been as ineffectual.

 

[Spoonwood]

I'm confident that someone putting up a poster has no real bearing on the actual legal system.

I poorly stated things above. It wasn't just some individual on a college campus. Look at the corner of the poster. The poster bears the name the of the university. It also got distributed on the campus. You can read more details here from skeptics who didn't believe the poster representative of much in the first place. No, THAT poster is not like something on a Tumblr blog or an obscure word press site. It's something that got promoted by an influential structure in the real world. Do you think that poster had no bearing on, or relevance to how the college would deal with rape cases, when the college endorsed that poster?

You say no bearing, but there exists more than just criminal courts. Family courts aren't courts of laws, but rather courts of equity. Do you think that rape claims or OTHER types of sexual assault claims without evidence have no bearing in family courts? On what a judge thinks and how they rule in such a court?

 

[Synobun]

I poorly stated things above. It wasn't just some individual on a college campus. Look at the corner of the poster. The poster bears the name the of the university. It also got distributed on the campus. You can read more details here from skeptics who didn't believe the poster representative of much in the first place. No, THAT poster is not like something on a Tumblr blog or an obscure word press site. It's something that got promoted by an influential structure in the real world. Do you think that poster had no bearing on, or relevance to how the college would deal with rape cases, when the college endorsed that poster?

You should read the links you post.

"Thank you contacting CHANT411,

The poster referenced in your email was created and distributed on our campus approximately 8 years ago and was very short lived – long before other campuses our size were having in-depth discussions regarding consent. Since that time, the conversation with our students about sexual consent has changed dramatically. Currently, educational initiatives regarding consent on the Coastal Carolina University campus include extensive online and in-person education.

If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us.

Scott"

You say no bearing, but there exists more than just criminal courts. Family courts aren't courts of laws, but rather courts of equity. Do you think that rape claims or OTHER types of sexual assault claims without evidence have no bearing in family courts? On what a judge thinks and how they rule in such a court?

I don't think they do, no. You're welcome to prove that a dropped case bears negatively in family court. What a judge thinks is a judge problem, not a consent problem.

 

[Spoonwood]

You should read the links you post.

I did read it. It acknowledge that such happened, which indicates that it wasn't some urban legend.

What a judge thinks is a judge problem, not a consent problem.

You just were talking about things bearing on the legal system:

I'm confident that someone putting up a poster has no real bearing on the actual legal system

How judges do things and what influences them does have some bearing on that.

 

[Synobun]

I did read it. It acknowledge that such happened, which indicates that it wasn't some urban legend.

A poster that one college had up for a short period of time nine years ago is the damning evidence against everything I've said? I'm comfortable.

 

[Spoonwood]

A poster that one college had up for a short period of time nine years ago is the damning evidence against everything I've said?

No, I didn't say that. But, I will note that you have said the above, after I presented that poster which that university endorsed, and you had said:

If you intend on claiming that a girl's word is law and the man's equal intoxication is irrelevant, please provide concrete evidence of this. I'm more than willing to go back on what I said and acknowledge the legal risk if you can present something more than a vague urban legend.

 

[Synobun]

No, I didn't say that. But, I will note that you have said the above, after I presented that poster which that university endorsed, and you had said:

A poster that one college had up for a short period of time nine years ago is not concrete evidence towards a girl's word being treated as gospel in a court.

 

[civver_764]

The law also doesn't say women get to decide what is too drunk. The law says that being drunk and not resisting does not constitute as ironclad consent. That seems fair. It ensures that a rapist can't say "well, they didn't resist" as a defense. I'm in favour of that no longer being acceptable even though I've been in a situation where such a defense was my only recourse (socially, not legally). It puts the responsibility of resisting a crime on the victim while distracting from the real problem that someone committed a crime, be it blatant or through a series of unfortunate events. I'm personally uncomfortable with a viewpoint that blames the victim for being a victim.

You're throwing the "not resisting" bit in there, which I don't think I ever mentioned. That's another matter which I will address below. Let's focus on the being drunk part. The problem with that is that it opens the door to consensual sex being defined as rape after the fact. This means that a guy that meant no harm, who thought he was having consensual sex, could potentially be accused of rape. Since the girl was drunk, even his claim/evidence that the act was consensual is not enough.

Why do you think a law that says "not resisting isn't consent" is detrimental to men if it's not because you think the woman should do more to resist being raped?

I never said this, but I will address this point anyways. Obviously, we can't expect the girl to "violently resist to their greatest ability", but there does need to be some resistance. The guy at least has to know that she's not consenting.

 

[Synobun]

You're throwing the "not resisting" bit in there, which I don't think I ever mentioned. That's another matter which I will address below. Let's focus on the being drunk part. The problem with that is that it opens the door to consensual sex being defined as rape after the fact. This means that a guy that meant no harm, who thought he was having consensual sex, could potentially be accused of rape. Since the girl was drunk, even his claim/evidence that the act was consensual is not enough.

The claim that he did rape her isn't enough either. Evidence is required.

I never said this, but I will address this point anyways. Obviously, we can't expect the girl to "violently resist to their greatest ability", but there does need to be some resistance. The guy at least has to know that she's not consenting.

I'm not sure you'll find many scenarios where a man can realistically say, "Gee, I just didn't know."