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.

 

OP/ED: Drudge Rape Poll: Disgusting

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1
BH,
You made my case for me.


I don't even know what your case IS. What is your case? And where is the proof for your case?

I can't find anywhere on the Internet where blue dogs fly South for the winter, but that doesn't prove they fly North... That's about how much logic your 'case' makes.

[edit on 23-4-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]




posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 06:58 PM
link   
df1, come on. Discuss the topic, there's no need for petty insults here.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
If as a man you were raped by a group of other men and then went forward to press charges against said men, would you want your face blasted all over the media? I think not. Your life has already been irrevociably changed and this would only add more trauma. Unfortunately because some women have abused this system to their advantage, I don't think that should subjugate the other valid claims to such harsh and permanent trauma.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I do not support this woman's name becoming public knowledge.

If a person works in a related sex trade it does not mean that they are a prostitute or giving permission to be raped.

If a person is drunk or high from drugs that also do not indicate permission to be raped or abused.

But, since the law has favoured women so much in recent years it is important that they understand the high price of nuisance claims and missrepresentation in terms of its effects on those accused. The penalties for lying and slandering must be high to ensure that false claims are not made strictly for the damage they can inflict on a person that may be innocent. I am not convinced that the legal system does a good enough job of making that clear to complainants yet based upon the number of stories of false complaints made in past.

I am not an American so I observe the US legal system from an outsider's perspective but the US system seems obcessed with a person's background for some reason at the exclusion of the case at hand if often appears.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by denythestatusquo

...I am not an American so I observe the US legal system from an outsider's perspective but the US system seems obcessed with a person's background for some reason at the exclusion of the case at hand if often appears.


We have a rather large problem here in the United States. It is called the media. If the media does not root out every last morsel of information about whomever it writes or speaks about, it is not satisfied.

The destruction of an individual's reputation means nothing to the media. That person is a non-entity to be ruthlessly exploited until the next big story comes along.

People are routinely sacrificed on the altar of circulation.

Do you not have the same problem in the UK? The Sun has quite a reputation.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 10:25 PM
link   
So, Kobe Bryant’s accuser (a woman) was revealed.



LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -- The 19-year-old woman who accused Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant of rape was named Tuesday by a nationally syndicated talk-show host and on the Internet, pushing her into the spotlight despite pleas for privacy from her family.
Source


Here’s one where the male victim’s identity is NOT revealed:



Source
Warren, who is serving a state prison sentence of five to 10 years on a prior sexual assault case involving a male victim, did not offer any comments during the appearance.


And another:



Police allege the 22-year-old male victim was driving on the F3 freeway through Tuggerah, which is also on the Central Coast…

Mr Hearn allegedly robbed, bashed and sexually assaulted him, police said.
Source


And another, where the assailant was a WOMAN, who WAS revealed!



Perez provided counseling to the male victim while she worked at Therapeutic Live-in Care, a residential facility in Camden.

The teen, who was 15 at the time, left the shelter in November 2004 to live briefly with a relative, Lynch said.

Perez engaged in sexual activity with the teen on several occasions in November and December at her former residence on Carman Street in Camden.
Source


Now, what has been proven here? Sometimes, the female victim's identity is revealed, especially when the accused is a famous person. But I have yet to find where a male's identity was revealed. And so do you. But I'm done looking.

Looks like your 'case' is in the toilet.



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 09:11 AM
link   
BH,

Sorry to nitpick, but:


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
So, Kobe Bryant’s accuser (a woman) was revealed.


She wasn't really named by the prosecutor. She was ferreted out by the press and then her name was spilled to the world. Someone leaked it, certainly, but it was not released through "official" channels. I'm not sure if this still counts to your point, as it was the news doing the naming, not the government (to whom the shield laws apply)


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Here’s one where the male victim’s identity is NOT revealed:



Source
Warren, who is serving a state prison sentence of five to 10 years on a prior sexual assault case involving a male victim, did not offer any comments during the appearance.


It seems clear from reading the article, that this victim was a child (as were the rest of this predator's victims). Children, unless I am mistaken, are shielded under a completely different set of laws, so this doesn't really apply to any discussion of rape shield laws as they pertain to adults.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And another:



Police allege the 22-year-old male victim was driving on the F3 freeway through Tuggerah, which is also on the Central Coast…


This one is from AUSTRALIA! No cheating!


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And another, where the assailant was a WOMAN, who WAS revealed!



Perez provided counseling to the male victim while she worked at Therapeutic Live-in Care, a residential facility in Camden.


Again, this involved a child. It is a different crime with a different set of laws. If you are simply trying to prove that in the history of all the crime ever in the world, a female accuser was named, I'm sure you can. But the topic of this discussion has always been rape (perpetrated by and upon adults). Otherwise, different rules apply.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Looks like your 'case' is in the toilet.


Honestly, I don't think he/she had much of a case to begin with, BH. Trying to prove that men are treated unfairly, through lack of press coverage is just silly.

In fact, how would one be expected to search that? Do you google: +"no name" +"identity withheld"? That's absurd, BH, and I wouldn't waste your time trying to refute this person. It is a silly exercise and a waste of your time.

Also, looking above, it is obviously really hard to find that kind of information in the press.

Bottom line, neither side, without the help of an attorney and several statisticians, can provide reasonable evidence that males are typically treated differently by rape shield laws. And, even if they were, does that mean we should do away with them, or work harder to make them more inclusive to men? I think the reasonable answer is the latter, and I'm sure most would agree, which means it's not really relevant to this discussion (since nobody would be advocating taking away her shield based on some others not getting similar protection).



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hamburglar
BH,

Sorry to nitpick, but:


You are not!


You make good points and I didn't notice that the one was in AU. I wouldn't knowingly 'cheat'.


And you're absolutely right, I shouldn't have wasted my time. df1's so called 'case' is a pipe dream.

Uh... thanks?



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrjones
A woman can have concentual sex with a man and then afterwards claim he raped her and noone can say otherwise because they were alone in the room.

So before you have sex get a signed concent form first!


That's a dang good idea! How about it, we make a patent or something on a card where a guy and girl carry cards around and if they are going to have sex both get their cards out and the other person signs it. This would also prevent so called "drunk rape" where both the guy and girl are drunk, yet only the girl was raped... You look at their cards, neither signed the consent card, both raped each other, case closed.

Sorry, but it happens all to often, a girl breaks up with her b/f and claims he raped her, or gets drunk at a party, has sex, and says she was raped. Now, how does that work?

Drive Drunk= Responsible for your actions

Kill someone while drunk= Responsivle for your actions

Break into a store while drunk= Responsible for your actions

Assault someone while drunk= Responsible for your actions

Run from cops while drunk= Responsible for your actions

Have sex while drunk= Not Responsible! Even if the guy was drunk he still raped you! Heck can sue the bar that sold you the alcohol, and the state for not enforcing its laws better, heck Kevin Bacon can be sued because everyone is connected to Kevin Bacon by 6 degrees of seperation, so by the time you are done you are a trillionaire.

As you see doesn't make sense in the least, you are responsible for everything you do while drunk except sex? What? You drunk, kill someone, 100% to blame, drunk, have sex, 0% your fault. WHo made that rule up? Also how do you prove you were drunk? or were so drunk that it was obvious you were drunk? At a party, random guy hits you up for some fun, doesn't know you just thinks you're cute, you are just drunk enough to say yes, next day scream rape. Don't say alcohol on breath, I'm sure he had alcohol on his breath so maybe he was drunk and you raped him! See?

[edit on 26-4-2006 by StarkMan]



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrjones
A woman can have concentual sex with a man and then afterwards claim he raped her and noone can say otherwise because they were alone in the room.

So before you have sex get a signed concent form first!


I think the consent form is a great idea. For both parties.


And just FYI, a man can have consentual sex with a woman or another man and then afterwards claim he was raped. That's not just an 'option' for women.


df1

posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I shouldn't have wasted my time. df1's so called 'case' is a pipe dream.

I assumed that you were a rational person based on your railing against the neocons, however I see that is not the case. You are just the like the neocons, government judicial secrecy is A-ok with you as long as it fits your misguided ideology.

It is amazing that you can not see that the reason you were unable to find anything concerning the shield laws being applied to males is the rape shield laws themselves. The secrecy involved in these laws denys the public the ability to oversee the judiciary in rape cases and in cases involving minors. The fact that YOU FOUND NOTHING, should be a grave concern to you.

You repeatedly gripe about government secrecy in the white house, but you have no problem with government secrecy within the judiciary. I would think that you would be able to see your own lack of consistency in this matter, but you're blinded by ideology. Try wiping the ideology from your eyes and you will realize that government secrecy is wrong whether it is happening in the white house or the judicial system.

Im sorry for reentering this thread, but I could not allow this misguided arrogance of yours to stand unchallenged.

[edit on 26-4-2006 by df1]



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I think the consent form is a great idea. For both parties.


But that assumes that something can't happen during sex to make either a woman or man decide hey, I don't like this, STOP and the other party doesn't. The consent form is signed, so does that make it not rape? What now?



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 02:09 PM
link   
geek grrl - You are absolutely right. Thanks for pointing that out.



Originally posted by df1
Are you a neoliberal?


I prefer the term neo-maxi-zoon-dweebi. It fits me better, I think. Don't you?


And no, I am not concerned. I see no indication whatsoever that the sheild laws aren't applied equally to male and female victims. DO YOU? Care to share?

Yeah, that's what I thought.


Buh-bye.



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 02:25 PM
link   
I heard before a man could not be raped by a woman. Is that true?


Just asking.....



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 02:58 PM
link   
I don't think that's true, dg.

A man doesn't have to be sexually aroused to have an erection, plus there are other types of sexual assault besides intercourse that would be considered rape.



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 05:43 PM
link   
As a cop, I can say without hesitation that the RAPE SHIELD LAWS are 110% necessary. Not only because of the Media, thats bad enough, but in large part do to the historical "She must have deserved it", "He is such a good boy", attitude that still prevails in much of the world.
I worked with and taught abused women and rape victims for years in Delaware and the impact on their lives in nothing less than devastating. Anything that we can do as a society to lessen that, we MUST do.
note: I was single for over 18 years (police work and SWAT does not a good family man make) and I will admit rather promiscuous, and I never had the "rape" card played on me. WHAT EVER THAT IS?
Come on people, it is a horrible, soul wrenching crime! Many women I have worked with have admitted that they would rather have been killed!!! It is violation at its basest form. The effects last forever and have destroyed more than one precious life.
As for those falsly accused. There are laws in place for the false reporting of any crime and these need to be enforced and prosecuted with fervor in the instance of the false reporting and accusation of rape. There-in lies the protection for those falsely accused.



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Bravo Policeman! I am a rape survivor and I can tell you that 30 years later I still cry and feel totally violated when I talk about it. We won't even go into the affect it has had on my sex life. You can ask my husband about when he found me in the middle of the night in the corner crying and I wasn't even awake. And that's after many years of therapy.

While I was reading your post it occured to me how ridiculous it is for men to complain that women are getting preferential treatment around this. If anyone wants to talk about unfairness between men and women as a generalization, ask yourself who's doing the raping... Then tell me men are getting treated unfairly.



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 04:11 AM
link   
It's unfortunate there are no laws to protect the identity of the accused. If those boys are innocent, their reputations will still be tainted by having the word "rape" combined with their photos sprayed all over national news. If they're guilty, that's another story.

If she's telling the truth, I'm sympathetic... to a point. Women have to be held accountable for putting themselves in bad situations. I walk into a bear cave without a gun, I'm asking to get mauled. A young girl or woman goes to a party hosted by Hell's Angels - and gets raped - ought to know better, too.

Yes rapists should pay for their crimes. But women who put themselves in bad situations should be held accountable for their own stupidity/ignorance/negligence. Victim pop-psychology makes me sick.


In the immortal words of Ed the Sock (from Much Music for those non-canucks), "Honey, if you walk into a McDonald's wearing a paper hat you're gonna get some orders..."

-S



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Savonarola
If she's telling the truth, I'm sympathetic... to a point. Women have to be held accountable for putting themselves in bad situations.

Held accountable for assuming that they won't be pinned down and brutally violated? Yes, being in a bad location could be due to naivly expecting men not to act like violent animals, but saying women should be held 'accountable' is the same as saying rape is a form of punnishment for staying out past curfew. Your attitude is common and only serves to protect criminals.



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 06:50 AM
link   
"Held accountable for assuming that they won't be pinned down and brutally violated? Yes, being in a bad location could be due to naivly expecting men not to act like violent animals, but saying women should be held 'accountable' is the same as saying rape is a form of punnishment for staying out past curfew. Your attitude is common and only serves to protect criminals."

Riley, some men are no better than wild animals. And ALL of us, men and women are reminded of that on a daily basis in the media, from friends, etc. Most of us avoid putting ourselves in situations with these types of people. And some people don't.

I wholeheartedly sympathize with rape victims who are dragged into an alley, forced/sold into prostitution/sex slavery (like in war-torn regions), raped in wartime, child sexual abuse/abduction/incest - in other words, victims of circumstance and not stupidity (like a woman I went to Uni with who was beaten and raped by a vagrant as she walked to her car after a movie).

I sympathize less with "victim chicks" (VCs) that consistently put themselves in dangerous situations (like strippers, prostitutes, alcoholics, drug abusers, and generally promiscuous women) and then act surprised when "some" man/men rape them. A good example of the "VC" is the woman who says she wants a "nice guy" but consistently dates the opposite (coke dealers that beat them, bartenders that cheated on them, hockey players who raped them, bikers who beat and raped them, boys with money, etc) - like about 20% of the women I've ever dated.

I'm not saying rapists shouldn't be prosecuted - I'm not defending rapists. I'm saying that women like this stripper (if her story's true) should bear some accountability for putting themselves in unsafe situations with questionable people. "If you keep petting strange dogs eventually one will bite."

-S

[edit on 27-4-2006 by Savonarola]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join