Rape? It's the fault of the victims, say 50 per cent of women

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by sos37

 

...and because she's dancing, having a good time, she's inviting some slime to rape her? Bull. She's had too much to drink? So? That's not permission from her to do anything to her other than order her a cab home.

She's done nothing to deserve being raped. Nothing.

Quit taking this out of context. When did I say dancing and having a good time?

I said:

* sexually explicit body language
* sexual teasing, taunting, provocation

Big difference between those and you know it. You're letting your emotions dictate your responses.

You can't argue that it isn't partially his fault. His actions directly caused him to be singled out as a target. The other man who made a better decision protected him.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


the fault lies with the guy who robbed them. Period.

Was the guy who pulled out his money stupid? Yes. Behaving irresponsibly? Yes.

At fault? No.

I think this is a problem with our society. We want to pass the buck. Blame someone else. "It's not my fault, because he/she did....."

People are responsible for their own actions.

reply to post by tallcool1


I agree 100%

But there are some people here who seem to think that if a drunk female has sex...then it is up to her if she wants to consider it rape or not...just because she was drunk. She may have had a great time...initiated the sex...but if the next morning she regrets it...there are those on here saying that she can rightly claim rape since she wasn't able to give sober consent.

This is what I am arguing against.

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by yeahright

Originally posted by sos37
Does the "No" rule still apply? Or would it be fair to say "Some day she's going to get raped because she keeps putting herself in that situation"?

It would be fair to say that, and it would also be fair to punish the cretin who raped her to the full extent of the law. A perceived invitation is not consent.

I've already said that I believe that rape is rape. I'm challenging the notion that the woman does not share part of the blame.

If you say that it would be fair to say that the woman in question in going to get raped BECAUSE she keeps putting herself in that situation then you must agree that SHE MUST share some of the blame.

Where's the personal responsibility for one's own actions these days?

Apparently, the personal responsibility does not lie with the rapist, or is it a shared responsibility? Just because someone does something that may not be too bright does not make them responsible for the actions of a criminal. Naive and unwise, but not responsible.

Originally posted by elevatedone
Someone said the phrase "invitation to have sex".

In my opinion, even if a woman invited a man to her place or anywhere for sex, she can still change her mind.

Right up to the minute that the "act" is ready to take place, it's still her right to change her mind, say no and be allowed to dress and leave.

Thoughts on this one... a man and a woman agree to have sex, a couple of minutes into it ( actual intercourse), she changes her mind and says she doesn't want to, if the man refuses to stop, is it rape? I say yes it is.

And do you think the woman should not be held accountable for any blame if intercourse were already happening and she said no?

My first reply to this thread was ...ask them again when they got raped themselves.

And after a while I was thinking...what is going on here? We are talking about rape here!

How can rape be the fault of the woman (or man in some cases)?

Rape is rape...it is something against the wishes of the woman...

THAT IS 100% THE FAULT OF THE RAPIST.

Originally posted by smyleegrl
I think this is a problem with our society. We want to pass the buck. Blame someone else. "It's not my fault, because he/she did....."

People are responsible for their own actions.

I agree that this is the problem with our society...and your way of thinking is allowing for this to happen.

I'm not saying that the man who committed the robery is not at fault...he is definatley at fault. I am saying is the man taking out and showing his money is also at fault.

Your way of thinking is giving the message that people should be able to do anything they want and should never be responsible if their stupid actions make them a victim of a crime.

YOU are the one encouraging people to not take responsibility for their own actions...not me.

It's my fault... I opened my front door

It's my fault... I didn't check the back seat of my car first

It's my fault... I shouldn't have gone for a walk alone

It's my fault... I smiled at him

Most of you know, but some do not, that women already blame themselves for the said-no-still-got-it kind of rape.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


If both are drunk, we are not talking rape any more are we? Neither party has the sense to consent.

Maybe that is why I do not address this straw man argument.

But there are some people here who seem to think that if a drunk female has sex...then it is up to her if she wants to consider it rape or not...just because she was drunk. She may have had a great time...initiated the sex...but if the next morning she regrets it...there are those on here saying that she can rightly claim rape since she wasn't able to give sober consent.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


I don't think this is what people are saying. At least, that's not the impression I got.

In my opinion, if a woman has relations with a man and then later regrets it and claims rape.....SHE IS WRONG. Period. And she should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

So perhaps people are differing on their definition of rape. Maybe we should nail that down further.

If you say no, and it happens anyway, that's rape. And the no can't be after the fact.

A woman who gets drunk and then falls into the hands of someone who takes advantage of that situation? She shouldn't be held accountable for the rape. Accountable for getting drunk? Well, I would argue that the hell she'll put herself through is far worse than any legal recourse society could take. And the problem is its a slippery slope argument.

Two people get drunk, have relations, and then later one claims rape? Not happening. Not the same thing.

Now that's just my opinion, for what it's worth.

Originally posted by yeahright

reply to post by sos37

 

I need to know where someone is going with that. Are we talking about sharing blame in the court of public opinion, or mitigating the responsibility of the rapist in a court of law?

Do you want the rapist's penalty to be less severe if the woman had a couple of drinks and wore a short skirt, or do you just want to do some sort of public, virtual-stockade judgment thing to the victim?

What exactly does "share the blame" mean? What is the consequence?

Public opinion and with self. There would be a firestorm of upheaval if the courts ever reduced or doled out punishment based on blame ratios. Personally I think it's a grand idea, but I don't believe American or UK society is mature enough to handle that ideology yet.

Heck, for whatever reason, just admitting to personal responsibility and not playing the victim 100% (when that is the case) seems to be something our society is incapable of doing. I refuse to think in terms of such absolutes - Not Guilty/Guilty = Black/White = Off/On.

Are there no shades of gray that should be considered? You know at one point the auto insurance industry was considering accident ratios - meaning if you had a traffic accident your premium increased based on a percentage of just HOW MUCH at fault you were. I believe this was never implemented because of the negative press the idea received.

Society wasn't even ready to accept personal responsibility for driving! So how can society be expected to do the same where a crime of such personal nature is involved?

reply to post by hotbakedtater


It is not a straw man...it is a valid argument.

YOUR LOGIC:

Sober Man...Drunk Woman: It is rape because she can't give sober consent.

Drunk Man...Drunk Woman: It is not rape.



Please explain to me how this makes sense? Because I think you just gave permission for drunk men to have sex with any drunk women without needing any form of consent.


You call it a straw man because you have no logical argument to refute it. It doesn't fit in with they way you want to think about this. You want drunk girls to be able to claim rape regardless of the circumstances...but my argument/example causes a problem in that thinking.

So instead...you just call it a straw man and ignore it.


Just so we are clear...you are saying if they are both drunk then it isn't rape?

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by sos37

 

Quit taking this out of context. When did I say dancing and having a good time?

I said:

* sexually explicit body language
* sexual teasing, taunting, provocation

Big difference between those and you know it. You're letting your emotions dictate your responses.

So engaging in what is PERCEIVED BY THE RAPIST as sexually taunting behavior, she is responsible for the ANIMAL male who lacks all sense and decency and self control he has to TAKE HER BY FORCE?

Oh, I see the logic now. Thanks for clearing that up for us.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by smyleegrl
I think this is a problem with our society. We want to pass the buck. Blame someone else. "It's not my fault, because he/she did....."

People are responsible for their own actions.

I agree that this is the problem with our society...and your way of thinking is allowing for this to happen.

I'm not saying that the man who committed the robery is not at fault...he is definatley at fault. I am saying is the man taking out and showing his money is also at fault.

Your way of thinking is giving the message that people should be able to do anything they want and should never be responsible if their stupid actions make them a victim of a crime.

YOU are the one encouraging people to not take responsibility for their own actions...not me.

This is totally what I'm saying! I'm glad there are some people on here who actually get it.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


I'm not responding to any more of your posts until you can respond logically and without the emotional outburst. Otherwise it's like arguing with a mailbox.

Should i be allowed to wear what I want to wear?

Am I responsible for mens lack of control?

Am I allowed to say no at anytime... Even during? And shouldn't my wishes be respected?

Do I deserve to be punched and kicked when i refuse? Or worse??

I will not be responsible for some pathetic "man" who cant control himself around a short skirt... And he had better be prepared to die if he tries.. I don't just mean that in a hypothetical sense either... My body is mine.. I say who, when and how

The women polled in the article are all probably DM readers who live in their bubbles.. Classic middle class white christians who have never been kissed and have a lot of cats...

That or it was really done by men...... Neither would surprise me

Originally posted by smyleegrl
I don't think this is what people are saying. At least, that's not the impression I got.

I entered this discussion because there was someone specifically saying this.

That is what I responded to, and that is what I have been discussing all along.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Oukast - when I was a naive young man and I lived in Augusta, GA for about half a year, I went to purchase some...herbal remedies from a local...herbal remedy distributor. The herbal remedy distributor put a gun in my face and explained to me why I should just hand over all of my money. I reluctantly agreed to his terms and hastily left the area with no money nor herbal remedy.

This was a learning adventure for me, but I don't think it was my "fault". Had I not been in that area looking for random herbal distribution personnel, I would not have forfeited my money. This much is true.I learned a lesson and avoid similar situations now, but it was not my fault that I got robbed. I do understand what you are trying to say, that the crime could have been avoided by the victim...but that does not make the victim at fault in my opinion.

I dont think women are to blame cuz they arent prepared or ready for the attack its still the attackers fault..so basically its like saying oh its her fault for being alive and living her life, and her fault for being there that day in her life.....i dont think so lol