It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: stumason
You're making the assumption there that the rape took place in the first place, see the problem? If you're drunk, consent to sex but then either regret it or don't remember the next morning, you should still be legally liable for the decisions made while drunk.
originally posted by: stumason
But far too often, the women is given the benefit of the doubt and without having to prove she didn't consent - even without any physical evidence of said "rape" - while the man has to prove he obtained consent.
originally posted by: stumason
Take the furore surrounding Ched Evans in the UK. A footballer who picked up a girl on a night out, she went willingly back to the hotel room with him, had sex with him, but then the next morning claimed she was raped because she was "too drunk" to have given consent.
originally posted by: stumason
Because it is such a miscarriage of justice! The stigma associated with being labelled a rapist is far worse than being called a murderer.
originally posted by: IShotMyLastMuse
a reply to: stumason
I don't get it, for all this talk about equality, we are forcing men and women into these bubbles of isolation
and sorry to sound cynical, but as someone already pointed out, if you, as a guy, had sex with a woman while drunk and accused her of raping you, people will laugh it off, because it has been decided that it's impossible for a woman to rape a man, you recounted your experience in the work place and how it was dismissed.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
I said IF you are raped. I made no presumption and also said there's the possibility that anyone can make a claim of something not being true with any accusation, it's not limited to rape. If a woman decides it was a mistake the next morning I don't think it's fair for her to claim it was rape, but unless the person were disturbed I don't think they normally would. I don't think it's something a normal person does for the fun of it.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
Maybe in the court of public opinion, but I'm not sure how any good defense lawyer could not make a pretty decent case when there is no physical evidence.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
I'm willing to be there are far more rapists out on the streets that were never convicted than there are innocent men in jail falsely accused.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
There are no facts in dispute and according to the law it was rape.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
If she did this in order to get money or some other nefarious end then she's not a victim, but he still committed a crime.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
It would be awful hard to prove that she set him up. I'm always suspicious when a high profile person is accused of rape for that very reason.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
The law is you can't consent to sex when you're intoxicated. Based on your source article she was very intoxicated. If you take home drunk people and have sex with them you are running the risk of being convicted of rape.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
It is a miscarriage of justice if somebody is falsely accused. The problem is people seem to think that claiming rape is something that you just do when you made a bad decision and that's not the case for a normal person. This is a very good reason to not go home with drunk people at bars or parties which it seems is overwhelmingly where this is happening.
originally posted by: IShotMyLastMuse
a reply to: Anyafaj
I'm sorry to hear about that, and i get it, we just take the precautions we feel we need to take to avoid a repeat of a traumatic experience, and sometimes we just end up building a wall around ourselves.
I know the world is a scary place and not everyone out there is a friend, but like i said, i hate this idea that we will be looking at each other as a default menace, that something as natural and fun as flirting will need eye witnesses and lawyers.
And while yes, men do take advantage of women that are in a drunk state, isn't it a bit condescending to put you ladies in a position of constant victim hood?
Doesn't this all seem to say "women are not capable of taking care of themselves a single bit"?
“an act of sexual penetration to which a person has given consent because the actor has misrepresented the purpose of the act or has represented he is someone he is not.”
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: IShotMyLastMuse
Sexual assault is rampant.
originally posted by: stumason
Exactly. It's all getting a little bit "Saudi" with the whole "men can't control themselves" and "women need protecting" malarchy.
originally posted by: stumason
Essentially, as the law stands, if a woman is drunk she cannot give consent, so you're fine if she doesn't regret it, but if the next morning she changes her mind, there is very little you can do to defend yourself unless you had the good sense to film it.
You do seem to be unaware of how many rapes are false allegations (something on the rise) and that makes me wonder just how many of these alleged rapes was an actual rape and not a case of the "morning after".
originally posted by: stumason
Ched Evans is a good example of exactly that. This is the story:
Essentially, she was embarrassed about being in a gang bang. The law has decided that the first bloke had, somehow, got consent from this drunk woman but the second bloke hadn't? How can that be possible? If she was too drunk to have consented to one, she was surely too drunk to have consented to the other?
The court heard McDonald met the woman and took her back to a hotel room near Rhyl, Denbighshire, sending a text to Evans stating he had "got a bird" or words to that effect. The jury heard that Evans had gone to the hotel, let himself in to McDonald's room and watched his friend and the woman having sex before taking part himself. The prosecution claimed that while the attack happened, friends of the footballer watched through a window. The men admitted having sex with the woman on 30 May 2011, but said it was consensual
In sentencing Evans, the judge said: "CCTV footage shows, in my view, the extent of her intoxication when she stumbled into your friend. As the jury have found, she was in no condition to have sexual intercourse"
originally posted by: stumason
And? One being in jail for something they didn't commit is bad enough, but you seem to be happy with the idea that putting innocent men in jail is ok as long as we catch the real ones too? Drag netting, much?
originally posted by: stumason
Actually, the case is being reviewed for a possible miscarriage. See above.
originally posted by: stumason
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
If she did this in order to get money or some other nefarious end then she's not a victim, but he still committed a crime.
How so?
originally posted by: stumason
There were witnesses in the room that said he didn't rape her! One of the men who had sex with her was found not guilty, but Ched Evans was! You seem quite naive about this whole topic, really.
originally posted by: stumason
Which is utter bollocks. The law says you are still legally liable for your actions even when intoxicated, so why is there a special exemption for sex?
And how can one bloke in the room be found not guilty of rape and the other was based on the fact she was "drunk" and not capable of consent? She either can consent, or she cannot.
originally posted by: stumason
And it still isn't rape. Taking someone back to your house/hotel and having sex with them, without any coercion or force, is not "rape" simply because they may be drunk. Being drunk does not abrogate you from your legal responsibilities. If I was drunk and stamped someone's head in, I'd be convicted of assault regardless, so why is it a special exemption that if you are drunk and have sex you later regret, you are "raped" and "unable to give consent".
originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
a reply to: JIMC5499
It is an inevitability that any movement, however righteous it may be to start, will be taken too far by its most fanatic supporters. Feminism has long since passed the middle ground. Modern feminists are by-and-large fighting for supremacy, not equality.
Obama interrupted the Grammy awards to give a BS PSA about the threat women everywhere face in the form of predatory men. He said "Right now 1 in 4 women in America have been the victim of rape or attempted rape."
An unbelievably high number, until you understand that 'attempted rape' encompasses a broad range of actions, including attempted forced kissing. So every time a guy tries to steal a kiss, or misreads a woman's desires, he is attempting rape.
www.washingtonexaminer.com...