Should A Rape Victim Be Obligated To Report Her Attacker?

Kiki T
wrote on July 7 2008 @ 03:50 pm: [report]

It’s each person’s responsibility to keep our society as safe and just as possible and I’d hope anyone in that unfortunate situation would use the best judgment they could, rather than letting fear or embarrassment hinder their choice.

As for that selfish guy, he sounds like a grade A PIG…. and fingers versus penis, big difference. If your virgin vadge couldn’t tell the difference, then yikes, sucks to be him. His life sentence: small peen syndrome.

LovesIt
wrote on July 8 2008 @ 07:37 am: [report]

Thanks for sharing such a personal story, Amelia.  While I do agree with Kiki that it’s up to the individual to make society safer in many instances, I think rape is especially traumatizing for many women and they shouldn’t feel guilty for “letting fear or embarrassment hinder” their ability to report the crime.  The psychological effects can be disastrous enough without feeling morally obligated to face publicly one’s attacker or go through the pain and humiliation of a public trial. 

This whole gray area thing is very disturbing, btw.  When/where did these guys learn to ignore yes/no?!

Amelia
wrote on July 8 2008 @ 08:01 am: [report]

@LovesIt I was chatting with a friend about this and I think one of the biggest factors is how utterly difficult it is to get a rapist prosecuted. If you feel like A) no one would believe you, and B) the authorities wouldn’t be able to do anything anyway, why would you prolong an awful experience I guess. I don’t know. I think women need to be encouraged to not be ashamed and to seek justice, but the justice system needs to be fixed as well.

Deirdre
wrote on July 8 2008 @ 08:45 am: [report]

I had two pretty frightening experiences. Once time I was physically attacked when I got off a subway (this was over 10 years ago when NYC was not as safe as it is now). I was not raped but I was beaten so violently by a male stranger that all I could think of was “if I survive, this guy is somehow is going to pay for this”.  Unfortunately after a police search and a few line ups this guy was never caught but I feel a twinge of guilt that he was not busted. Why couldn’t I fight him off and beat him to a pulp (well being 110 pounds at the time did not help)?. I use to think of other women he may have attacked. 

Another time a roommate left the window by the firescape open. We lived on the 2nd floor.  One early morning when she was not home someone climbed in!  Hearing the noise I hid under my bed. We were robbed ( not much to take- he even left our crappy TV behind) but at the time, I was seriously “preparing” to be attacked. I was certain he would look under the bed and find me, which did not happen. I was shaking and sweating. I had a comb in my hand, which I thought I could use to “stab” him.  Coincidentally there was a rapist that use to rape women in that area by breaking into their apartments. For a long time I use to think maybe the guy who broke into my place was the rapist. Maybe I could have stopped him. I would fantasize about stopping him. So I guess yes it is your duty to report a rape or any crime where you feel your personal space and security has been violated. Any man who takes advantage of women physically is not only pig but a sick twisted coward who will continue to pick on women because they see them as the weaker sex and I believe their acts will get more violent and bold as time goes on.  Just my opinion.

AnnikaH
wrote on July 8 2008 @ 12:33 pm: [report]

I agree that women have an obligation to report a rape, in order to prevent an attack on another woman. Maybe if rape was less of a hush hush topic it would lose its stigma, and therefore more women would be willing to speak up. I’ve always wondered if a rape victim becomes the “weak, violated woman” because that’s how she feels or because that’s how the media portrays her. I also don’t think there should be a statute of limitations in rape cases because once a rapist, always a rapist. And I’m equally afraid of the term “gray rape.” I hope it doesn’t make it into our lexicon because it will give license to loser’s in possession of roofies.

Cate
wrote on July 10 2008 @ 04:14 am: [report]

I’m really uncomfortable with the term “gray rape”. When the whole Cosmopolitan gray rape thing first happened about a year ago, it really bothered me. I understand that there are different degrees of rape, but at the bottom line, you were forced to have sex against your will. Rape is rape. Putting a less threatening color in front of the word “rape” doesn’t make it any less horrible.

Hugo Schwyzer has a very interesting take on this matter and the concept of “enthusiastic consent”. He says that, ““The opposite of rape is not consent. The opposite of rape is enthusiasm…I always argue that anything short of an authentic, honest, uncoerced, aroused and sober ‘Hell, yes!’ is, in the end, just a ‘no’ in another form.”

I agree with him 0. And as far as what Moe and Tracie were saying - I think that they’re incredibly irresponsible, and an embarrassment to the feminist/women’s issue’s community.

LovesIt
wrote on July 10 2008 @ 06:27 am: [report]

@Cate: Right on. Rape is rape. @AnnikaH: I think she feels like a “weak, violated woman” because she is… literally.

Amelia
wrote on July 10 2008 @ 07:09 am: [report]

@Cate I totally agree with you and Schwyzer. I think there’s the idea of “gray rape” though, because people feel the need to distinguish between rapes that leave the victim extremely emotionally damaged and ones where maybe the victim doesn’t feel as…I dunno…scarred, like, I guess, in my case. It’s a real tough issue, but the point of the matter is that no one should think sticking a color in front of the word rape somehow makes it more okay.

becktasm
wrote on July 7 2009 @ 08:39 am: [report]

Until our rape legislation in this country is completely revamped, I think rape victims are in no way obligated to report their rapes. I didn’t report mine because I didn’t want to relive it. I didn’t want to go to court and face him (if I even had enough evidence to get him there in the first place). I didn’t want to tell the police every little detail. And most of all, I didn’t want to be blamed for it, which I knew I would be since I had been drunk. Until all these things change, a huge portion of rapes will remain unreported. Many of my friends have been date raped and have not reported it for all those reasons, or because they actually DID blame themselves. Clearly when a woman is raped it’s never her fault, but our society seems to tell us otherwise, and more than a few times I have tried to coax my friends into getting a rape kit only to hear, “No, it was my fault, I was drunk,” or, “No, I can’t blame him, I said yes at first.” You cannot demand that a woman who has already been abused go through that abuse again, psychologically, for months or years longer. This is how our justice system operates when it comes to rape. It’s sad, and it’s not changing.

GreenAura
wrote on July 7 2009 @ 08:54 am: [report]

My friend went to Tijuana for Senior year spring break(I didnt go on the trip).  An American guy in a bar slipped some GHB in her drink and the next thing she remembers is waking up in his hotel room, with blood coming from her rectum.  She had been sodomized, and didnt remember anything.  She only knew it was his room because she recognized his shoes on the floor.  There were also used condoms in the trash.  He happened to be in the shower when she woke up and she high-tailed it out of there, called her family and had her mom drive all the way from Vegas to Tijuana to pick her up.  She never reported it because she was scared of him, she had no idea who he was, and she was embarrassed.  As her closest friend I felt horrible because I couldn’t offer anything more than a shoulder to cry on.  I never told her to report him.  I didn’t know how to help.  I just hope that no one else has ever been hurt by him.  To this day, I still don’t know if she should have reported him.

MoonBabye
wrote on July 7 2009 @ 09:40 am: [report]

Wow. I’ve had a similar experience, except it was a boyfriend in college. Don’t feel ashamed, Amelia! I was a late bloomer too. I didn’t realize what had happened, in terms of the “gray rape”, until I was training to be a volunteer for a crisis hotline. Then the realization fell like a ton of bricks and I was out of sorts, but it was too late. I feel a part of me has buried it deep down. I did tell him what he did but I didn’t rip into him like I probably should have. Needless to say, we broke up and I refused to have anything to do with him.

joyy
wrote on July 7 2009 @ 09:45 am: [report]

Ugh, my best friend in college had “the switcheroo” pulled on her (she was also a virgin when it happened her freshman year in college).  He kept trying to hang out with her and email and whatnot - he didn’t register doing what he did as rape or even anything remotely wrong.  I don’t recall if she eventually spelled it out for him, but she didn’t want to report it so I found myself in @GreenAura’s shoes - not much to give but a shoulder to cry on and feeling helpless for a friend.

snap
wrote on July 7 2009 @ 10:22 am: [report]

there is definitely no moral obligation to report a rape.  in most cases, reporting won’t do a thing.  in amelia’s case, there would have been no legal action.  maybe, just maybe, she could have gotten him on a sexual misconduct charge, but that’s about it.

no victim ever has an obligation to report a crime, so why should it be any different for rape?  every woman should allow herself to heal in the best way possible.  sometimes reporting isn’t the answer.

as for your story, amelia, that is truly a terrible experience.  it would have traumatized me as well.  if nothing else, that guy needs to know that what he did was TERRIBLY WRONG.

rdkilldujour
wrote on July 7 2009 @ 01:57 pm: [report]

sad that so many of us have personal knowledge of what’s being discussed.

vtgirl1993
wrote on July 9 2009 @ 01:16 pm: [report]

I ran into a similar situation in college. I dated a guy who I knew “got around.” He had dated several of my sorority sisters, as well as a few friends, so I knew he wasn’t virginal. When we started dating, I flat out told him that I wouldn’t have sex with him EVER, so if that’s all he wanted then he should move on…ok by me. He didn’t, so we proceeded to date for the summer.

One night he got really wasted and rather than let him drive home, I let him sleep stay over. We had done this before and he had always been respectful, so I thought nothing of it this time. Suddenly, I’m awakened by him holding me down with one arem and ripping my nightgown off with the other. As he started tugging at my panties, I calmly told him that if he continued, then it would be rape and I would have no problem going to the cops. I related this a few more times until it finally hit him and he rolled off…back to sleep.

Obviously, I kick his ass out later and refused any contact with him. I went to the cops and the campus police, but both told me there was nothing I could do as he hadn’t actually raped me. I told them that he’d either done this before or it was only a matter of time; they just shrugged.

A few weeks later when the semester started, I talked to my sister about him and one quietly whispered, “You mean he stopped for you?” WTF!? Two other girls he’d dated said the same thing—they said “no” and he kept going. First of all, I was pissed beyond belief. This ass was a date rapist and my “friends” let me go out with him knowing this little fact?!? Once I got past the anger, I tried to get these women to report him so some future woman wouldn’t be raped, but they refused. God knows how many girls have encountered this monster.

jillybeaner
wrote on July 9 2009 @ 03:11 pm: [report]

I am so fortunate not to have been in any of the situations that you and others have mentioned.  My heart goes out to anyone who has.

The situation you wrote about absolutely disgusts me.  What a pig.  Any guy who has to have sex that way—or by drugging or forcing someone—is beyond pathetic and doesn’t deserve to be called a man.

On another matter: what is wrong with still being a virgin in college?  I was when I started, and never felt like I had to make excuses for it.  I just hadn’t met anyone who interested me enough. So no need for a euphemism like ‘late bloomer’!

(P.S.  It was worth the wait!!)

alphabete
wrote on July 9 2009 @ 03:23 pm: [report]

I once had an encounter with a guy who I considered a friend.  He was my neighbor.  He and I ended up having sex one night and then he wanted to have sex again.  Since I was never really able to be comfortable and relax during sex I was not into the idea and hoped he would just go away.  I’d have gone away (the usual) but we were in my apartment.  Long story short he raped me.  Period.  There was plenty of “no” and scratching and some more “NO” and nothing had any effect.  I went to the hospital, got a rape kit, left my clothes and everything with them and took a bunch of tests and was given a bunch of medicines.

I went to the police, who questioned me until I was in tears and the end result was that “He would have to come in here and say ‘Officers, I raped that woman’” for him to be arrested.”  I left the police station mortified, humiliated, and knowing that just because his semen is on your panties and his skin is under your nails doesn’t mean anything because you can’t possibly be raped by someone if you’ve had sex with them willingly, ever.  I even had finger marks on my arms, face, and neck from where he restrained me.  I ended up moving away from there in a hurry.

If it ever happened to me again I wouldn’t report it because after baring my sex life and describing in graphic detail to the police what happened, I felt like they wanted to hear it just to be hearing it.  Whether or not that was true, I learned my lesson and would have to also be stabbed, shot, or recently escaped from kidnapping to bother going to the cops about being raped.

Mojo Jojo
wrote on July 12 2009 @ 06:43 pm: [report]

I was ruffied and raped in the Army at 19 years old. I didn’t report it because in that environment I would have been ostracized, and even if I had reported it, I had been drinking underage, and it would have been blown of as a barracks slut having morning-after remorse.

So no, I don’t think I was obligated by any means to extend my pain any longer than neccessary, or to permanently scar my military career by airing my dirty laundry for everyone to hear.

I wish I was strong enough to face it anyway, and have justice served, but the reality was that the repercussions of coming forward were far more damaging than the gratification of justice. I pray that no one else was hurt, but you must realize when you are already damaged and scared by what was done to you, personal strength isn’t the easiest thing to come by. And if we now start punishing women for not coming forward, they may never get the support and counseling they need to heal.

bobthe
wrote on July 15 2009 @ 07:13 pm: [report]

There is no “gray rape”? I find that position HIGHLY troubling.

Sadly, there will always be areas of gray when it comes to human relations.

Let’s take Amelia’s situation and allow me to make some assumptions/hypotheticals.

The guy apparently was offended that she could not tell he switched from finger to penis when they first had sex. She said she didnt want to loose her virginity, but since when is any statement made during sex absolute? From this guy’s position here was a woman who was making all the right noises and all the right moves, yelling out his name while he rubbed his penis against her naughty bits. Next he moved to applying pressure with the head of his penis against the opening of her vagina. She kept on moaning and told him to make her cum. He naturally assumed she decided she wanted sex, there and then, her previous statement of not wanting to loose her virginity that night forgotten - not by him by by HER.

Doesn’t sound too far fetched to me.

Should he have asked just to make sure? Sure.
Could he of reasonably concluded that there was consent at the time the actions in question were taking place? Sure.

See the problem?

To suggest that just because Amelia said ‘no sex’ at the get go means that this statement is a blanket and continued ‘no’ is just as nonsensical as saying that once someone says yes then there is no turning back, consent is given and it cant be retracted.

People are always free to change their minds, and so long as sex isn’t an activity witnessed by a panel of independent witnesses with some sort of brainscan technology that allows them to view the thought patterns of both parties involved - consent is never going to be 100% all of the time.

Rape is a horrible crime but to suggest that things are so black and white is just plain naive.

sportzriter13
wrote on July 15 2009 @ 09:48 pm: [report]

God bless you for sharing this, Amelia. It can’t be easy to talk about.
Rape is sex you do not consent to.Period
According to RIGL chapter 11-37, section 1, definitions
“The following words and phrases, when used in this chapter, have the following meanings:

(5) “Mentally incapacitated” means a person who is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his or her conduct due to the influence of a narcotic, anesthetic, or other substance administered to that person without his or her consent, or who is mentally unable to communicate unwillingness to engage in the act.
  (6) “Physically helpless” means a person who is unconscious, asleep, or for any other reason is physically unable to communicate unwillingness to an act. “

number 8 is kinda graphic but says any kind of penetration, “no matter how slight” counts as a sexual act.
go to section 4
Ҥ 11-37-4 Second degree sexual assault. РA person is guilty of a second degree sexual assault if he or she engages in sexual contact with another person and if any of the following circumstances exist:

  (1) The accused knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally incapacitated, mentally disabled or physically helpless.”

That says it all, don’t you think?
BTW= RIGL means RI general laws, you can find it on a lickety split google search. I checked there first because that’s my home state. Check your local laws to see what they say, but most are probably going to have something along those lines.
Two things to take away from this
#1-be aware of what’s going on, and be careful with alcohol (learned this on one of the first days of my RAD class)
#2-rape is rape, report it so the next woman doesn’t become a victim too.
If this was committed in RI, and this dirtbag had been reported, he would be serving a sentence of 3-15 years at the ACI.
Grey rape is BS!

bobthe
wrote on July 15 2009 @ 11:01 pm: [report]

sportzriter13,

“dirtbag (who deserves to spend a decade in the slammer)”? Are you sure you aren’t taking things too far?

Consider the facts:

Amelia apparently CONSENTED to being penetrated by this guy. Her issue was WHAT he used to penetrate her with.

Amelia was under the impression that the guy himself thought that she realized he had switched to his penis from his fingers.

NOTHING in this story suggests that at the time of penetration with his penis did the guy think he lacked Amelia’s consent.

How can you equate this to the same criminal offense where someone is raped in a dark alley or during a home invasion, maybe at gunpoint, fearing for their life?

Amelia’s story sounds to be more one of miscommunication, not a crime of violence.

_jsw_
wrote on July 15 2009 @ 11:37 pm: [report]

@bobthe: While I agree that violent rape is worse than non-violent rape, and while I agree that Amelia’s example wasn’t the same as someone who was gang-banged at a frat party,  the point is that she did not consent to it. The guy can’t just assume that his fingers are OK and so therefore his condom-less penis would be just fine too. There is a huge difference between saying yes and not saying no. And in her case, Amelia had told him she didn’t want to. That is saying no. But regardless, she needed to have said yes. Not no ≠ yes. And “yes, yes, yes” then… “no” means no. And it clearly affected Amelia emotionally and still lingers.

A number of people very close to me have been raped by men who did not do so violently. They (my friends) were typically incapacitated at the time (a couple were simply afraid, not incapacitated). Two of them were drugged (unbeknownst to them). The fact that they weren’t beaten up doesn’t mean they weren’t raped. The fact that they had a drink didn’t mean they intended to become drugged. Even if they had set out to get drunk, that doesn’t mean they were ripe for sexual conquest.

“Amelia apparently CONSENTED to being penetrated by this guy. Her issue was WHAT he used to penetrate her with.” Um, yeah, so fingering is the same as sexual intercourse. Right. Not in my world.

“Amelia was under the impression that the guy himself thought that she realized he had switched to his penis from his fingers.” (a) He’s an idiot and apparently not very well endowed; and (b) that assumes he did it anyway, then figured the lack of protest was a yes. Wrong.

“NOTHING in this story suggests that at the time of penetration with his penis did the guy think he lacked Amelia’s consent.” She told him she didn’t want to. He never asked if it was OK. He never had her consent. If he thought he did, he was thinking like a date rapist.

“How can you equate this to the same criminal offense where someone is raped in a dark alley or during a home invasion, maybe at gunpoint, fearing for their life?” Gosh, you’re right. I suppose because she wasn’t actually injured and didn’t fear for her life, it was OK. Presumably, then, if I can break into your bank account and take all your money, it’s not as bad as if I’d robbed you at gunpoint. so it’s OK. I mean, you didn’t tell me I couldn’t. And it wouldn’t physically hurt you at all. So it’s OK, yeah?

“Amelia’s story sounds to be more one of miscommunication, not a crime of violence.” Not all crimes of violence leave physical scars.

I agree. It was rape. There are degrees of rape, and this was one of the lessor degrees, but it was rape. He had (unsafe) sex with her, without her consent. That’s rape. Period.

bobthe
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 12:24 am: [report]

_jsw_,

I hate to beat a dead horse, but I feel this is a subject that needs discussion.

Amelia FIRST said she didnt want to have sex. However one declaration of ‘no’ does not mean that consent can not be given, either explicitly, or implied, later on during the course of a make out session.

Since I’m new here and don’t know how to make fancy quote “in italics” text, let me just bring up some issues with what you said.

You don’t view digital penetration as ‘the same as’ penetration with the penis. Thats your OPINION, but the law in nearly all jurisdictions disagrees. They find ANY penetration to be the same, and if they dont call it ‘rape’ they call it the same crime by a different name, such as ‘sexual battery’. Amelia CONSENTED to be sexually penetrated by this guy. What is at question is WHAT he used to penitrate her with.

You seem to gloss over the importance of this. She CONSENTED to sexual penetration. Her issue was WHAT he used to penetrate her with.

Please remember that when you consider if this guy raped her or not.

Being not so well endowed isn’t reason for 10 to 15 in the pokey Not as long as it isnt a capital crime to wear a push up bra

Is the guy an idiot? Well personally I probably would have asked her specifically before proceeding. But any reasonable person must admit the PLAUSIBILITY that if a guy is making out with a girl and she is making all the right sounds and an active participant in the act when he switches from his using a finger to using his penis to penetrate her that she has in fact given implied consent. Remember there is no need for a signed, notarized consent form before engaging in sex acts. Nor does consent need to be “yes, place your penis into my vagina now please.”

Seriously. A partner does not have to ask “is it ok” to reasonably believe they have implied consent to engage in any particular sexual activity at any particular time. This is a totally unrealistic standard for every instance of human relations. Sure he should have been more sensitive and asked. Maybe if she DID want sex right then and there, that night wast the right way to loose one’s virginity. But failing to check is NOT the same as knowingly lacking consent AT THE TIME.

Please don’t stoop to strawmen here. We could go back and forth all day long with how Amelia gave the guy a blank signed check so his taking all the money in her checking account wasn’t really ‘stealing’, even if she didn’t think he was going to go all the way and totally clear out her coffers. Not only that but it doesn’t even argue the point I was getting at. I’m critical of the ‘rape is rape’ response to this situation. Clearly things are not cut and dry with Amelia’s experiences.

Look, I don’t deny the fact that there are things this guy could have, or even should have done differently. I don’t deny the fact that this was clearly a traumatic experience for Amelia. All I’m saying is that these two factors do not automatically equate to rape.

This guy could have (and Amelia’s own statements suggest he did) reasonably believe he had her consent, the fact that she (presumably) remained an active, willing participant in fooling around while his penis was inside of her (even though she was unaware) would only have reinforced this belief.

I simply cant see the logic of saying “oh I didn’t think you had THAT inside of me” three days later makes this a clear cut case of rape.

*sam*
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 03:02 am: [report]

being a victim of this so-called “gray” rape the fact that anyone could even come *close* to justifying that this guy didn’t *exactly* rape her, is, I’m sorry, *disgusting*. No, neither her nor my experience left me completely traumatized, but that still doesn’t change the fact that it wasn’t right. Do I think this guy deserves 10yrs in jail for the offense? No. Perhaps a court-ordered class on sexual misconduct and rape and the myriad of ways a women says “no”—and still means it.

As for being morally obligated to report it? I’m not sure. In my own situation, I didn’t, and I never will. It was New Years, and I was drunk and passed out in my bedroom—fully clothed and *alone*. I woke up at some point later, to one of my roommate’s friends actively having sex with me. I wasn’t even aware they had come back to the house (the left earlier to go to another party). Needless to say, I kept blacking out and waking back up to this, and when I was awake, I didn’t exactly start crying and screaming “no”. In fact, I kind of went along with it, b/c for whatever reason, I always told myself that if I ever found myself in a rape situation, I would just go along w/ it, b/c somehow, it would be less traumatic.

The next morning, I told my other roommate (and best friend of like 12yrs) what happened, and she asked me if I wanted to report it (and that she would go with me if I wanted her to). I told her that it wasn’t necessary, b/c let’s face it, nothing could ever be done a/b it. I therefore did not feel the need to completely humiliate myself in front of the police by detailing my hazy recollection of that night. Moreover, even if by some miracle, they brought the guy in or notified his chain of command (he’s in the Navy), I would undoubtedly have to sit through an examination of my sexual history and listen to people who have never met me before not-so-delicately indicate that I’m a slut in his defense. I do not deny that it was rape. I certainly did NOT consent to having sex with him before he managed to undress me while I was passed out drunk in my room. However, I also know that this guy, in general, is not a *complete* monster. Yes, what he did was wrong, but I cannot simply call him a monster knowing full well that he wasn’t exactly sober himself (he was def. drunk off his ass and had been doing cocaine all night).

However, regardless of the fact that I did not feel morally obligated to report him, I *did* feel morally obligated to tell the girl he was supposedly “seeing” at the time a/b what happened. Not only b/c it constituted cheating and she was my friend, but b/c he certainly did not use a condom, and I have HPV (from a cheating ex-BF… yay for infidelity, right?) and could not endure the thought of him contracting it and giving it to her. (*especially* considering HPV is practically untraceable in males and is certainly not tested for in the military’s routine STD screenings..at least not that I’m aware of anyway).

_jsw_
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 08:30 am: [report]

@*sam*: I’m so sorry that happened, and it sounds a like like a typical case, unfortunately. I agree that you’re not obligated to report it as that might lead to a situation which is in many ways as hurtful as the original situation: the legal system. One of my friends did try to pursue action against a guy who drugged her. The police came over, removed all sorts of evidence, and carried it away (this was two years ago). The detective assigned to the case almost never returned calls, never really looked into anything, and never managed to get the evidence returned to her. He let the guy know she’d reported him, which led to nothing actually bad but some unpleasant situations and fears, and she never went to trial. She did learn that others had reported him, and that her report would go on his record, but that’s of little help when no action was taken. Thus, while I agree that reporting it is typically helpful if it establishes or strengthens a case against him due to prior actions, even that often leads nowhere. It is a traumatizing crime that all too often is unpunished. :(

_jsw_
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 09:40 am: [report]

@bobthe: I completely agree that this is a subject that needs discussion.

“Amelia FIRST said she didnt want to have sex. However one declaration of ‘no’ does not mean that consent can not be given, either explicitly, or implied, later on during the course of a make out session.”

I completely disagree. She explicitly gave non-consent. She never retracted that. And the thought that a lack of explicit non-consent = consent is a staple philosophy of date rapists. She said no - and all she needed to have done was not say yes. There is no such thing as “implied consent” for a first sexual encounter among relative strangers. It doesn’t have to be an explicit signed and notarized “yes, I give you permission to enter my vagina with your penis”. However, it needs to be a very clear positive affirmation, not the lack of a negative one, and it should be verbal and it has to be when not under duress. One of my friends, who has been fortunate enough to have been raped more than once, once guided the man into her after saying no, which he took to be a sign of consent but which she did to avoid further damage to herself when she considered it to be an inevitable act when she was alone with him and felt unsafe. She never said yes, and Amelia never said yes. And even when a woman says yes, it’s not valid if it’s under duress.

“You don’t view digital penetration as ‘the same as’ penetration with the penis. Thats your OPINION, but the law in nearly all jurisdictions disagrees. They find ANY penetration to be the same, and if they dont call it ‘rape’ they call it the same crime by a different name, such as ‘sexual battery’. Amelia CONSENTED to be sexually penetrated by this guy. What is at question is WHAT he used to penitrate her with. You seem to gloss over the importance of this. She CONSENTED to sexual penetration. Her issue was WHAT he used to penetrate her with. Please remember that when you consider if this guy raped her or not.”

Oh, God. Are you seriously arguing this point? Seriously?

Fine.

Yes, any penetration would be rape in most or all states if consent wasn’t given. It’s certainly be battery at least. However, just because consent to one form was given does not mean consent to any form is given. For example, battery is defined as “intentionally touching or striking a person against their will.” It is the “against their will” part that matters. I can be fine with someone patting me on the back with their hand but not fine with them patting me on the ass, or punching me in the shoulder, or patting me on the back with their penis. I can’t believe you’re actually arguing that consent to one form of penetration - one which isn’t likely to transfer an STD (although it’s possible) and which won’t cause pregnancy - is the same as consent to any form of penetration. What he used to penetrate her is exactly what I’m remembering when I consider whether he raped her or not.

“Being not so well endowed isn’t reason for 10 to 15 in the pokey Not as long as it isnt a capital crime to wear a push up bra”

Yes, you’re right. I was totally arguing that his small penis is why he should have been punished. If he had a monster dick that nearly split her in two, she would have been able to say no seconds after he raped her instead of much later on. Clearly, he deserves to be called a rapist purely because of his tiny penis. Or, as I suspect, a penis that isn’t that distinguishable from fingers by a drunk virgin.

“Is the guy an idiot? Well personally I probably would have asked her specifically before proceeding. But any reasonable person must admit the PLAUSIBILITY that if a guy is making out with a girl and she is making all the right sounds and an active participant in the act when he switches from his using a finger to using his penis to penetrate her that she has in fact given implied consent.”

So you’re saying that the proof it isn’t rape is when - after the guy inserts his penis into her - she doesn’t protest? No. You’re wrong. The lack of protest is not consent. And a drunken person can’t really give consent anyway. If you’re so hard-up that you need to pursue sex with drunk women who don’t actually tell you “no”, then you’re a bit pathetic.

_jsw_
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 09:44 am: [report]

“Remember there is no need for a signed, notarized consent form before engaging in sex acts. Nor does consent need to be ‘yes, place your penis into my vagina now please.’”

Obviously. As much as I am disgusted by date rapists, I don’t think that a couple needs to have a completely sober discussion before a witness outlining the choreography of their first sexual act. However, the typical guy belief is that a lack of “no” means “yes”. Of course, sure, many women have sex with men and don’t actually say the word yes and yet are glad it happened. Not all sexual encounters where there isn’t an explicit consent are unwanted by one of the people. But many are, and any man who can’t take a few minutes before sliding his dick into someone to ask them if it’s something they would like to do as well isn’t much of a man, in my book. I’m not arguing for emo levels of discussion and hours of talk. I’m just saying that anyone should be able to say - yes, actually speak, odd as it might seem - something like “things are going great, I’d like to take it further, how would you feel about us having sex?” If she truly wants it, the fifteen seconds it’d take to say that and get a response aren’t going to put a damper on everything. And, by the way, if she’s incapacitated with alcohol or anything else, she can’t give consent, so, when you screw a drunk woman, it’s rape. You might get lucky and she might not care or might not press charges, but it’s still rape because she wasn’t in a frame of mind to consent.

“Seriously. A partner does not have to ask “is it ok” to reasonably believe they have implied consent to engage in any particular sexual activity at any particular time. This is a totally unrealistic standard for every instance of human relations. Sure he should have been more sensitive and asked. Maybe if she DID want sex right then and there, that night wast the right way to loose one’s virginity. But failing to check is NOT the same as knowingly lacking consent AT THE TIME.”

Don’t be ridiculous. Standards in long-term relationships, or really any relationship where sex has occurred in a consented fashion before, are different. It doesn’t mean the guy can have sex whenever he wants, but certainly, after consent is clearly given, it’s not required to be as clear later on - but if it’s unwanted, it’s still battery and, if it goes far enough, rape. And in the case Amelia mentioned, failing to check is exactly the same as knowingly lacking consent AT THE TIME.

“Please don’t stoop to strawmen here. We could go back and forth all day long with how Amelia gave the guy a blank signed check so his taking all the money in her checking account wasn’t really ‘stealing’, even if she didn’t think he was going to go all the way and totally clear out her coffers. Not only that but it doesn’t even argue the point I was getting at. I’m critical of the ‘rape is rape’ response to this situation. Clearly things are not cut and dry with Amelia’s experiences.”

I’m not sure if you’re clear on the difference between a straw man argument and a valid analogy. The bank analogy wasn’t a straw man. It was a similar situation, it was used simply to support my position, and it didn’t misrepresent yours.

“Look, I don’t deny the fact that there are things this guy could have, or even should have done differently. I don’t deny the fact that this was clearly a traumatic experience for Amelia. All I’m saying is that these two factors do not automatically equate to rape.”

Sexual penetration without consent is rape. You even said it. You went off on some bogus path that consenting to one means consenting to any, but you yourself gave the reason that this situation was rape.

“This guy could have (and Amelia’s own statements suggest he did) reasonably believe he had her consent, the fact that she (presumably) remained an active, willing participant in fooling around while his penis was inside of her (even though she was unaware) would only have reinforced this belief.”

Sure, he might have believed it, but he didn’t reasonably believe it. He was with someone who was drunk, he slid his penis into her and then, apparently, went back to using his fingers. He got away with it. Doesn’t mean he reasonably thought she consented. Anyone who thinks a drunk person can reasonably consent to anything like that is wrong. She told him she was a virgin, and he did that so he’d be the first. He snuck it in, he did it when she was drunk, and he didn’t mention it until she did.

“I simply cant see the logic of saying ‘oh I didn’t think you had THAT inside of me’ three days later makes this a clear cut case of rape.</i”

You’re right. That isn’t what makes it rape. The act of sticking his penis into her made it rape. Does he deserve <i>prison? No. Is zero punishment OK? No.

_jsw_
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 09:48 am: [report]

@everyone: Sorry. Got carried away with a rant.

bobthe
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 11:32 am: [report]

_jsw_

first of all, can we please stop the ad hominem attacks on this guy? I guess you didn’t catch my attempt at humor in my last effort on this front, but it doesn’t serve any purpose. Besides. Both parties here were drunk apparently. Dont berate one when you excuse the other.

That said….

I agree. Amelia specifically gave ‘non-consent’ at the start. However your suggestion that there is no such thing as implied consent is simply wrong from the legal standpoint and the reality of human interactions.

I also agree that a lack of protest does not automatically equate consent.

However this situation goes beyond a simple lack of protest. Amelia was apparently a WILLING, ACTIVE, CONSENTING participant in sexual activities.

I’m not trying to argue that consent to one form of contact is the same as consent to ALL forms of contact. I’m arguing that such consent muddies the waters and makes it difficult for one to say that the guy in this case did or should have known that he lacked her consent to transition from the use of his fingers to the use of his penis.

How realistic is it that Amelia did not recognize this transition? He thought she knew. He thought she was enjoying it and a continued, willing, active, consenting participant.

By the way… The law is in agreement on this subject. Battery does not occur when someone makes innocent, common contact with another person regardless of the persons feelings of that contact. You could HATE all forms of human contact but if I walk up behind you and place my hand on your shoulder when I inform you that you dropped your purse in isle 6 thats NOT battery. Furthermore consent to physical contact from a particular activity is an affirmative defense against unwelcome contact. If You happen to get a rough body check in hockey, thats not battery, even though you don’t want to be checked.

I will point out with amusement one trend I see in your responses. You put the onus on the man. You say he needs to ‘take 15 seconds before sliding his dick in’. Why is it the man’s responsibility? I mean we aren’t talking about a situation of a stranger passed out on a park bench with her legs open. In cases where there is any chance for uncertainty shouldn’t there be an equal responsibility on both parties? It’s just as easy for a woman to EXPLICETLY express her feelings as it is for a man to specifically ask.

Don’t you understand how difficult you make this discussion? You feel that the standard of consent changes in couples, or in situations where sex has already taken place (amusingly enough, you conveniently ignore your OWN philosophy in this case, since Amelia DID consent to sexual penetration from this guy). But what happened to rape is rape? Consenting to sex 1001 times does not mean you consent to 1002. Consent is consent. And if you accept the level of consent on time 1002 then it should be accepted on the first time as well.

He didnt REASONABLY believe it?

I guess we have different standards of ‘reasonable’ then. If I’m with a woman, and my penis is physically close to her vagina and we are engaged in foreplay I expect her to know if I’ve switched from using my fingers to using my penis while touching her. I don’t think that most people, or specifically, women would find that to be unreasonable. Knowing that she remains an active, willing participant in these activities would lead me to believe that she is consenting to such activity. I don’t think many would find that unreasonable either. I don’t see the problem here.

That brings us to the crux of my position. You think it’s obviously rape. But you don’t think it’s a crime worthy of punishment. At least not any jail time. What happened to rape is rape? If it’s rape, upon conviction this guy would have to register as a sex offender. He would likely get a MINIMUM sentence of at LEAST a good few years behind bars.

Rape is a very serious crime and should be treated as such. Despite the fact that we don’t agree on what to call what happened in Amelia’s case we seem to agree that it does not rise to the level of the harsh punishments that are used in rape cases. So then clearly we need something else to describe this sort of scenario. If this is rape then clearly rape is rape is not a workable philosophy.

_jsw_
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 12:46 pm: [report]

@bobthe: I suspect, since there have been about 20,000 characters of text posted by us with no other comments, that we’re in this alone now. Perhaps we can meet in the middle, perhaps not.

First, with respect to ad hominem attacks: all I was getting at was that the fact that he’s not built like a rhino and that she therefore didn’t know he’d been in doesn’t mean it wasn’t wrong.

The fact that they were both drunk doesn’t excuse his actions. He initiated it, and while you continue to assert that she “willing, active, consenting participant,” what she actually said was that it occurred briefly and she didn’t even know it had happened. Had she actually truly been actively consenting and participating, I seriously doubt he would have stuck it in and then removed it almost immediately. She had told him she “didn’t really think [she] wanted to give it up on a first date with this dude. Which [she] explained, which he heard, which he said he respected.” Yes, she was a willing participant in sexual activities, but she had clearly explained her limits to him. He agreed. He then violated that agreement without so much as a mention of it and then furtively resumed his other activity as a cover. Of course he knew he didn’t have consent for sex. They’d actually already discussed that.

I agree that battery does not occur when someone makes innocent, common contact with another person regardless of the person’s feelings about that contact. However, sliding your penis into someone isn’t innocent, common contact, nor are the examples I gave of slapping one’s ass and so on.

You’re amused that I put the onus on the man. I’m disturbed that amuses you. In this case, they discussed it, she expressed that she didn’t want to have sex, and he had sex with her anyway. You apparently believe that, even though she said she didn’t want it, his furtive deflowering of her whilst drunk was OK because, hey, his fingers in her were OK. He chose to have sex with her. She didn’t choose to reiterate that, just because his fingers were in her, his penis wasn’t OK - because she’d already said that. And even if she hadn’t, in cases where it isn’t “innocent, common contact,” consent needs to be given. Period. One shouldn’t have to explicitly state that such contact is not desired, and moving along the path to a given type of contact should not be taken to assume that all such contact is OK.

You say my approach would make the conversation difficult. You say I ignore my own philosophy. Not valid on either count. First, the suggestion that a verbal acknowledgement from a non-incapacitated partner prior to the first sexual encounter should be required isn’t exactly bizarre. If you can’t stop long enough for that, you shouldn’t proceed. It’s not like someone will die if they don’t get laid right now. And I merely stated that consent becomes more and more implied over time. Once an action is said to be OK, it’s normal and acceptable to assume that it’s OK until told otherwise. Of course, this doesn’t mean it’s always OK and welcome, as no one is constantly in the mood for sex, but it’s reasonable to assume that, once someone is a regular sexual partner, until things change appreciably in the relationship, sex is consensual under reasonable circumstances.

I agree that, when both partners are not incapacitated, an explicit verbal acknowledgement is not required as long as non-verbal cues suggest it’s OK and as long as neither partner feels threatened or afraid to decline. However, since it’s rarely the case that people who are just starting to date each other can truly know what their partner is feeling, I feel that it is never wrong to at least ask. One who is so hard up for sex that they can’t even do that is pathetic.

I do think it was rape, and I do think it is deserving of punishment, and I would have gone into more detail had I not already been at the end of two consecutive 5000-character-limit comments. I think that someone who viciously rapes a woman deserves more punishment than someone who takes advantage of a drunken date. But I think both acts are despicable. Someone who has sex with a non-consenting drunk date is a sex offender, and the fact that men get away with it all the time doesn’t mean that they should get away with it. Anyone with even a shred of common decency can wait until the woman is coherent and until she consents.

bumbler
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 01:04 pm: [report]

@jsw Amen.  I agree with everything you’ve said here.

_jsw_
wrote on July 16 2009 @ 01:16 pm: [report]

@bumbler: Thank you. Sorry about all the rambling… it’s a “raw nerve” topic for me. :o

bobthe
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 10:05 am: [report]

_jsw_,

Here we go again

first off, sorry if i took your comments the wrong way, but I didnt read your attacks on the guy the way you claim them to be. After all you did suggest he was the sort of guy who ‘needed’ to get a woman drunk to bed her. If thats not the case then i retract my previous statement.

Now on to the issues at hand.

About size. This is one thing I have actually talked to several of my women friends about before I came back to respond to you. I personally, and no one I talked to found it rather likely that a woman wouldn’t know (unless nearly passing out drunk - not how Amelia portrays this situation) that a man has moved from using his fingers on her to using his penis. Size issues aside, the motions are different - and come on if the guy is too small for her to notice the difference then surely he isn’t long enough to slip it in from a position that doesn’t make his actions more or less obvious. This goes back to the mindset issue. If he could have reasonably understood that she knew he changed what he was using in their foreplay, then he could reasonably think that she was consenting to penile penetration, instead of manual.

Be honest now. How plausible is the scenario that she wouldn’t know the difference? NONE of the women I spoke to thought it was a likely story. One gal, who I often debate various issues with and is about as pro woman, anti rape as one can get went as far as to say that Amelia’s story stretched credibility to the extreem. I’m not saying thats not how it went down. I’m asking how realistic is it that the guy was thinking she didn’t know? I think it’s much less likely than the idea he thought he was pulling a fast one while she was unaware.

Regarding the issue of their intoxication. I was in no way using that as an excuse for his actions. I was simply pointing out that both were drunk in response to your ad hominem attacks of the guy.

Yes, he initiated the sex act in question, and when i say that she was a willing, active participant I am not talking about his penis being inside of her, but rather her general demeanor at the time. Again we go back to mindset. I don’t think we can reasonably say that he likely would have known that she didn’t realize he was inside of her, so her active participation in foreplay could have easily been construed as implied consent for penetration with his penis.

You say he knew he didn’t have her consent, I argue that the facts of the story don’t suggest this. After all if he was truely in the mindset of being ‘sneaky’ about it why would he have blown his cover a few nights later on when he told her they actually had sex for the first time in the night in question and not when Amelia thought she lost her virginity? All evidence points to him thinking that she knew, AND was ok with it.

I agree that sliding one’s penis into another is not innocent contact, but it surely is something that can be expected to happen when two people are naked, on top of one another in the proper position, and one has consented to being fingered. Just like the body check in hockey.

I’m disturbed at your being disturbed. Honestly, aren’t you for equality and all that? women are never going to be treated as equals to men when the mindset is allowed to exist that they are some sort of weak, delicate creatures that need to be protected from men’s baser instincts. The onus for communication should rest equally on BOTH parties. Yes she said once that she didn’t want to have sex that night. Does that mean that this statement should be considered in force for the rest of the night despite her own actions? That doesn’t sound too reasonable to me. Yes. He could have asked. But by the same token she could have clarified her feelings, because obviously he didnt understand them.

bobthe
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 10:06 am: [report]

You know, you really are making me chuckle with this line of argument. First you say that there needs to be rigerous standards for sexual consent the first time out, then afterwards it’s OK to go off of implied consent and ASSuME certain things are OK. What did you miss about my argument that consent is consent. consenting 999 times does not mean a woman consents then 1000th time. that sort of thinking is EXACTLY how spousal and date rape occurs. If it’s acceptable to go on what you THINK she wants the 1000th time, then it’s ok any other time. You either do consent or you don’t. Implied or otherwise.

but back to this notion of explicit verbal consent. Do you think that really happens in the real world? I am 33 years old and have slept with 10 women. There was explicit verbal consent with only ONE of those women, and thats only because it was a close female friend who was watching a movie with me, who out of the blue said (much to my surprise, since there had never been any funny business between us before) “I’m bored, this movie sucks, do you want to have sex?”. I’d wager that this instance doesn’t really count.

Does not explicitly asking for consent make one hard up for sex? i don’t see how. It just doesn’t seem to be a common thing when one gets down to business. And you yourself don’t seem to think it’s ESSENTIAL, just a good thing. And you’ll get no arguments there. You claim it’s ok to go off of implied consent and use what you THINK your partner is thinking. Thats EXACTLY what happened in this case sadly the guy didnt interpret the situation correctly in this case. That doesnt make him a rapist imho

_jsw_
wrote on July 17 2009 @ 03:13 pm: [report]

@bobthe: I choose to believe Amelia’s version of the story, you don’t, and that’s a key difference and one we won’t be able to resolve here.

I also disagree with you about consent the nth time after the 1st time. I think there are more rigorous standards for determining if it is ever OK vs. “OK again now.” You said “if it’s acceptable to go on what you THINK she wants the 1000th time, then it’s ok any other time.” I disagree.

With respect to the other 9 women you’ve slept with (the 9 you didn’t ask you), I already stated that verbal agreement is not necessary when neither partner is incapacitated or afraid. I said I don’t think it ever hurts and that it only takes a few seconds. Given that no birth control is 100% effective, either in terms of contraception or protection against STDs, you’re about to enter into an action that could produce a pregnancy or transmit diseases, so taking a minute to discuss it isn’t unreasonable. However, no, I don’t think it’s rape just because it wasn’t discussed. However, I do think it’s rape when the woman is incapacitated to the point of being unable to make a decision of that type, regardless of whether or not they would have agreed when sober.

I think we simply believe different things. I do think it was rape, you do not. In the end, it doesn’t matter in this case, because the guy isn’t ever going to get charged with anything.

bobthe
wrote on July 20 2009 @ 02:54 pm: [report]

_jsw_

You misunderstand me. I’m NOT saying that I don’t believe Amelia’s story. I’m simply saying that what was going on in her head was not something that the average man (or woman it seems) would expect. That leads to cases where one person honestly believes one thing and the other honestly believes something different.

Now of course this problem could be rectified by seeking explicit permission as you suggest, but the onus for communication should be on BOTH parties. But failure to clarify the situation is not the same as the stautory requirement for rape, that being the condition of knowing that, or reasonably should have known that consent was absent.

Forgive me for beating a dead horse, but again I must point out your strange choice of words. You said *I* didn’t ask for explicit permission before the first act of sex with 9 women. Why presume that should *I* be the one to ask? I’m by no means a fast mover. Fully half of those experiences were cases where the woman initiated sex.

We must agree to disagree. You seem to think that moving goal posts when it comest to consent is perfectly ok. You seem to think that the beliefs of the presumed victim are all that matter to exclusion of the good faith beliefs of the other party. You conveniently term the possible victim as a ‘woman’, despite that fact that male rape occurs in large number too. Forgive me for thinking this position to be rather sexist.

_jsw_
wrote on July 20 2009 @ 03:34 pm: [report]

@bobthe: Believe as you will, but everyone else who has expressed an opinion on the matter disagrees with you. The discussion about the obligation to report a rape is very mixed (understandably so, unfortunately), but I think you’re the only one that thinks that she wasn’t raped. Any reasonable person would know that consent not only hadn’t been given but had explicitly been denied; apparently, you think that an ongoing and constant denial is necessary to establish that consent hasn’t magically and spontaneously sprung into being.

You’re also the only one who thinks that standards for determining consent remain the same from the first time to the thousandth time.

You asked why you need to be the one who asks. You don’t. The person who initiates the sexual behavior needs to adequately determine that the other person is interested. Not just not actively resisting them, but interested and consenting. As agreed many comments above, this does not have to be established verbally, but it needs to be established. Someone who is drunk cannot consent. The fact that the other person might be drunk doesn’t absolve them from the obligation, anymore than one can claim that any assault is acceptable because they were drunk at the time.

Finally, I dispute that the statutory requirement for rape is the condition of knowing that consent was absent. Instead, ”[l]ack of consent is a necessary element in every rape. But this qualifier does not mean that a person may make sexual contact with a minor or incapacitated person who actually consented. Lack of consent may result from either forcible compulsion by the perpetrator or an incapacity to consent on the part of the victim. Persons who are physically or mentally helpless or who are under a certain age in relation to the perpetrator are deemed legally incapable of consenting to sex.”

A drunk person qualifies as “mentally helpless” or “incapacitated”.

RbMc
wrote on July 29 2009 @ 11:43 am: [report]

Reporting a rape should be totally up to the victim. They’re the ones that are going to have to talk about it, and make it known to the people that are close to them. And, while some people find solace in letting it all out, others cannot think about it at first without breaking down. Either type of person has to relive it every time they have to talk about it. Which makes them the victim again and again. It also forces them to wonder why. Why me? What did I do? What could I have done? Some people will need time before asking these questions because they have no answer due to the fact that IT WASN’T THEIR FAULT. And the “gray rape” is not really that “gray”. Most people that are reported in these type of cases wanted the victim to be drunk so that they wouldn’t be able to say no. That’s no better than using any other type of drug that takes away someone’s right to deny anything that they don’t want.

dareka
wrote on August 4 2009 @ 03:42 pm: [report]

@bobthe

The guy’s response when Amelia reiterated that she hadn’t wanted to have sex was “I couldn’t help myself.” Not that he’d “thought it was ok” or that “she seemed to be implicitly consenting,” but a response that clearly indicates that he was well aware of the situation and chose to ignore her wishes and her right to decline sex with him simply because he wanted to have sex. I don’t understand how this situation could be considered anything other than rape.

lisilouwho
wrote on August 4 2009 @ 07:59 pm: [report]

This actually happened quite a bit at the US Air Force Academy - the girls would get drunk, pass out, and the guys would rape them. Passed out means they didn’t say no, but also didn’t say yes. In the end, the girls who reported it lost their careers, and the guys got off on the technicality that nobody had said no. It’s nice to think that reporting any type of rape is the key to putting the creep who committed it behind bars, it doesn’t always work that way. I myself had a similar experience (something slipped into my drink, woke up in the middle of the night with some guy enjoying himself at my expense), but never reported it. 1) I have no idea who the guy was - he was gone before I fully regained consciousness, and 2) there is the fear of the police/lawyer/judge throwing the fact that you were in a bar in your face. “How much, exactly, did you have to drink? Why were you in a bar? etc, etc. Ripped my favorite sweater, too… sigh.

Have2Comment
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 01:22 am: [report]

Okay, I actually registered on the site SIMPLY to comment on this very important discussion.

I agree with pieces from both bobthe and jsw’s arguments, but I lean towards jsw on this one.  I feel that if there hadn’t been a discussion beforehand on Amelia’s views on sex with this guy, then letting him finger her COULD have been interpreted as implicit consent to sexual penetration.  However, there WAS a discussion about it, a very explicit one where she CLEARLY stated she didn’t want to have sex with him yet.  He said he respected that, which made it an explicit verbal agreement to not have sex until she consented.  Therefore, in my opinion, the gentlemanly thing to do would ask her out loud for consent before just slipping it in.

Also, we can argue back and forth about whether or not it’s plausible that she didn’t realize the difference but again, she was a virgin, so the knowledge we as devirginated people take as common sense might not have been so common to her.  That’s the same kind of thinking that makes it so hard to report rapes…in this misogynistic society, we look for reasons to demonize the woman instead of staying neutral as the law is supposed to do.

To respond to dareka’s comments, had his response been, “I thought it was okay” or something similar, maybe then I could sympathize with him a little bit.  Maybe then the arguments in his defense would be more plausible.  But “I couldn’t help myself” is just a little too piggish.  It implies that he knew what he was doing was wrong and did it anyway because he got caught up in the heat of the moment and decided he didn’t care.  I understand that they were both drunk, but in my opinion, that’s like letting drunk drivers off of the hook and I don’t think MADD would be too happy about that.

BlacksmithSpawn
wrote on August 13 2009 @ 08:17 am: [report]

Like a previous commenter, I registered just to respond to this. First of all, I am a female college student at a school that was named a big party school last year by one of the several lists. This will give y’all some perspective on my view.

I wanted to raise an issue that never seems to make it into discussions in the right way. Why is it that women are let off the hook for being drunk, that if they later regret having sex because THEY MAKE THE DECISION TO GET HAMMERED, the guy is automatically a date rapist? If drunken stupidity gets a girl off the hook, it should get the guy off the hook and both should be told to watch their alcohol intake and keep their junk in their pants. This obviously does not hold true when the victim is drugged/coerced, but the vast majority of date rape cases I hear about on my college campus (which as a whole, has the moral restraint of alley cats), BOTH parties were drunk, but the girl is painted as a victim (you know, because obviously she has no control whatsoever over what she drinks).

Frankly, I would love to know where these workers are that make it so hard on the woman. From what I’ve seen of the justice system, it’s pretty much brown nosing die-hard feminists and screwing men over every day.

I’m sorry if this is seems like it’s trivializing legitimate rape cases - true victims deserve all the justice, help and support possible, but at the same time, I resent being told that women as a gender are too weak-minded to refuse a drink; I resent that our campus police force is ridiculously willing to arrest guys for “rape” even when the girl was lying (this actually happened on my floor freshman year) and I resent the fact that you modern women can’t wise up, and realize that you’re wasting your lives throwing yourselves away like this before marriage.

*sam*
wrote on August 13 2009 @ 09:59 am: [report]

@blacksmithspawn: “and I resent the fact that you modern women can’t wise up, and realize that you’re wasting your lives throwing yourselves away like this before marriage. “

harsh much??? geez, just b/c you may not agree with us ‘modern women’ getting drunk and having sex before marriage, doesn’t mean that you need to resent us all for it. that’s a bit much in my book.

though, I understand your concern for the male when it comes to alcohol. idk if you read my earlier post, but I made it a point to consider his sobriety in my decision to *not* report what happened. this doesn’t excuse his actions, nor make them OK in any way, but it was def. a mitigating factor.

and I could be wrong, but I would think that if a date rape case were to be taken to court when alcohol is a factor for both parties, that it would be taken into consideration as a mitigating factor for the defendant. but like I said, I could be wrong.

RbMc
wrote on August 13 2009 @ 10:52 am: [report]

I agree that some guys don’t deserve to be accused. Unfortunately this mindset is what hurt the girls that aren’t lying. It goes both ways. The girls that lied and were believed are sometimes found out later and makes it hard to believe the girls that didn’t lie without more proof. And proof is hard to come by especially when you take time to think about turning them in. Most girls don’t like the dirty feeling and make sure they scrub/toss everything connected. If you even think you might turn them in for what they did I would suggest doing it while all the evidence is fresh.

As for the drinking it really depends on their mindset before they are drunk. Is the guy getting her drinks because he’s hoping to get her too drunk? Or is he just being nice? That can go both ways. But most guys won’t admit they were raped.

Whooptedoo
wrote on August 15 2009 @ 05:03 am: [report]

Rape is a crime where the victim is assaulted and penetrated. Thanks to the author for sharing the story but there was no crime committed here and the word rape does not apply. Period.

A woman ALWAYS has the right to say no. And she has that right at any time. BUT… she has to say no and she has to back it up with action i.e. get dressed, leave the area, etc. To continue to willingly lay there naked and allowing your friend to stimulate your hotspot and penetrate you manually is not rape.

In this case she can’t even say for sure the man had penetrated her with his penis. He SAID he did but could easily have had some reason for misleading her. Perhaps he was angry with her for some reason when he told her that. As noted above she was aware she was being penetrated and had no issue with this. Obviously no crime was committed and it is inappropriate to file a complaint with the police.

Sexual relations are a common activity and people spend a lot of time and attention to pursuing this. Just because sex happens doesn’t mean there is a crime.

Rape is a serious crime and deserves to be actively pursued when it occurs. Please don’t muddy the waters by making accusations when you were just sucking face and got carried away.