In today's news...

[Hopeyouguess62]

Re: In today's news...

Someone showed me an article in

You must be registered to see the links

that discusses the justifications used (and believed) by a gang-rapist in India.

My first emotion upon finishing the article was rage, rage at anyone who would dare force themselves upon a woman and then choose to blame the victim. Then I said to myself, "Well, I guess I'm lucky to live in the US and not India--we wouldn't ever consider this kind of justification reasonable."

Upon further reflection, though, I realized that I was wrong. Rape and sexual assault occur quite frequently in the US, and all too often we ask ourselves how the victim could have prevented the crime. In a rape trial, the plaintiff will often face scrutiny: the victim's clothing, sexual history, level of intoxication, and character are as much on trial as the accused. We (the US) have made progress in the past several decades, and I hope that over time that progress will continue. It would be wrong, however, to view this as a problem for other cultures and not my own.

 

[Motuk]

Re: In today's news...

Well, when a society starts to believe everyone is a victim and no one should be held accountable for their actions, this will continue to happen.

 

[MrMe]

Re: In today's news...

Theres a good reason why rape accusations are met with such scrutiny, the sheer amount of false accusations makes the conviction process a legal mine field.

When people think rape you think of a stalker ambushing some girl on a dark path in a park or dragged into an alley way, but actually the majority of 'rapes' are actually between people that know each other.

Generally its a case of the girl gets pissed as a fart, gets flirty with some guy or the guy flirts with her and one thing leads to another, they fuck, she wakes up and feels ashamed because a lot of women still see the stigma that if they're 'easy' they're sluts, or she's not satisfied maybe has a sore twat from the pounding, and so ends up accusing the guy of rape and ruins his life because so many people are stupid fucks that believe that just because a guy is accused of raping a woman he is automatically guilty.
See the Duke College incident from a few years back and the media hype around it for how fecktarded and demonising rape acussations are.

 

[XSI]

Re: In today's news...

Theres a good reason why rape accusations are met with such scrutiny, the sheer amount of false accusations makes the conviction process a legal mine field.

When people think rape you think of a stalker ambushing some girl on a dark path in a park or dragged into an alley way, but actually the majority of 'rapes' are actually between people that know each other.

Generally its a case of the girl gets pissed as a fart, gets flirty with some guy or the guy flirts with her and one thing leads to another, they fuck, she wakes up and feels ashamed because a lot of women still see the stigma that if they're 'easy' they're sluts, or she's not satisfied maybe has a sore twat from the pounding, and so ends up accusing the guy of rape and ruins his life because so many people are stupid fucks that believe that just because a guy is accused of raping a woman he is automatically guilty.
See the Duke College incident from a few years back and the media hype around it for how fecktarded and demonising rape acussations are.

While this may be a thing in western society, Indian gang rape is a real problem and generally not people who know eachother.
It really is a gang of stalkers ambushing a woman and raping them

Quote from article

she and her male friend hailed a private bus, where they encountered a pack of five drunk men on the lookout for sex,

Definitely not just a woman who got flirted with and regretted it. And that's the case for most of the indian rapes everyone hears about
As the article mentions, it's a cultural thing. In the west women are pretty much safe and equal, but in India they're considered to be less than men in many ways. And because of that, rapists can say "She was out when it was dark, she practically asked for it"

 

[Ranger Princess]

Re: In today's news...

*snip*

The real problem in your example isn't the men or the women. It's the media. They want to make money and need a reason to justify their existence, so they rile everyone up with scare stories without really caring if it's true or not. We have innocent until proven guilty for a reason, and it's a shame the media has to try to butt in on everything just to make a buck.

That being said - I don't agree with the idea that getting drunk should be a free pass for anything that happens next. People are still responsible for their actions when drunk, just like they would be arrested if they assaulted someone, robbed a place, or killed someone's kid because they ran a red light and crashed. Rape is just as bad as all those things. I'm sure there's a lot of men in the world that would be pretty unhappy if they woke up naked in some random person's room with a sore butthole because someone just violated them the night before and rightly so. That "stigma" you pointed out would be even worse for a male victim. Nobody deserves to be violated, whether they are women, men, gay, straight, or trans.

 

[Hentaispider]

Re: In today's news...

The real problem in your example isn't the men or the women. It's the media. They want to make money and need a reason to justify their existence, so they rile everyone up with scare stories without really caring if it's true or not. We have innocent until proven guilty for a reason, and it's a shame the media has to try to butt in on everything just to make a buck.

That being said - I don't agree with the idea that getting drunk should be a free pass for anything that happens next. People are still responsible for their actions when drunk, just like they would be arrested if they assaulted someone, robbed a place, or killed someone's kid because they ran a red light and crashed. Rape is just as bad as all those things. I'm sure there's a lot of men in the world that would be pretty unhappy if they woke up naked in some random person's room with a sore butthole because someone just violated them the night before and rightly so. That "stigma" you pointed out would be even worse for a male victim. Nobody deserves to be violated, whether they are women, men, gay, straight, or trans.

So you're responsible for anything you do while drunk, except when someone has sex with you while he's ALSO drunk, then HE(or she?) is responsible while YOU are not?

If you're unable to give consent while drunk, then whoever has drunk sex with you must ALSO be unable to give consent, therefore making BOTH of you rapists in equal measure.

 

[Courage Wolf]

Re: In today's news...

Actually... And I rarely speak up, but the Law is pretty clear on this. Impaired judgement or no, RP is correct, everyone is held responsible for their actions while inebriated for one reason. They made the decision to enter that state, and accepted all the risks that come with it.

This leads to several uncomfortable facts, and some nasty ones that no one wants to bring up, but I'm going to to show everyone present the black and white that I had to live with learning, and accepting in my own judgements when I encountered a situation.

First and Foremost, the above includes ALL parties inebriated. Part of getting drunk, high, what have you, is having impaired judgement, this is NOT victim blaming, but it does lead to higher risk behavior and raises the likelihood of running into a predator with lowered inhibitions. This is obviously dangerous and Rape is only one possible outcome.

Second, and also important, the law makes the clear distinction between victim and predator. While it is a crime to perform certain actions, it's also difficult to prove there was a crime if both parties were drunk, and therefore Neither testimony on either parties part can be taken as complete truth. These issues become much simpler when a sober individual gives testimony without drunk goggles.

Third. and by far most important, while I'm not in the action of laying blame at a victim's feet for what happened, I hold every person accountable for every action they take from the moment they wake up and enter a conscious state. This includes decisions to imbibe alcohol or other substances, victimize a person, take high risk behavior... And this is a view point extremely common and accepted among police officers, the people who society trusts ( in varying degrees ) to prosecute criminals, because it is unbiased, which is the true goal in an investigation.

As a society, we make exceptions for people who are not in a lucid state, however, drunk does not apply. Things such as temporary insanity hold water, but drug use does not, which is exactly what alcohol consumption is, because it is a choice. It. Does. Not. Matter. What the reason was, what occasion there may be. What matters is that the choice was made. If a rape occurred, then I hold the rapist accountable for the sexual assault, but I also believe in coaching people in safer behavior. It seems a bit stick in the mud'ish, but placing yourself at risk is just that. A risk.

This obviously does not excuse anything, nor does it make a true predator safer to be around. Many Rapists are trusted individuals. People who made the victim feel safe, only to turn around and abuse that trust. Moreover, this issue has been further clouded by people calling rape, when in fact, the evidence proved no such thing occurred, but that the supposed victim's blackout state upon awakening led them to believe they had been victimized.

It situations like that that have led to people questioning things so heavily, and why drunken testimony cannot be taken over any evidence (Or lack thereof ) A sad state of affairs, but nothing and no one is perfect.

Rather then look at this, and let your views color it, take it for what it is. A peek into the workings, a look at the machine. And maybe the smallest piece of council towards safer behavior.

I drink, I used to do drugs, but I either did them alone, behind a locked door, where I was a threat to no one but myself, or I did such things with an escort, friends I could trust to look out for me, and trusted me to do the same. I still do, you'll never catch me at a bar alone, because I know myself, and I have a man I can trust to always reign me in. Please everyone, my friends here. Be Safe, it doesn't mean don't have fun, just be careful. The monsters are real, but so are the safeguards.

 

[Smokefish]

Re: In today's news...

it doesn't mean don't have fun

I had fun once and it was awful.

Never again.

 

[MrMe]

Re: In today's news...

@XSI - I'm aware, my post was directed at Hopeyouguess
@Ranger - Oh absolutely, its why I brought up the Duke College incident.
For months the media vilified a group of frat boys as rapists because a girl had accused them of gang raping her.

Turns out she was a prostitute they had hired but didn't use her because she turned up as a complete mess, the examination of her found out she had several men's sperm in her vagina... DNA tests proved that none of which belonged to any of the accused.
Almost complete media silence after that.


And then there's Gert Wilders, media was more than happy to call him a rapist.
Not so happy to say the whole story that he and a woman had consensual sex, they went to sleep, she woke up to find him going at round two.
Is that really rape? Abuse of trust sure, but when you're in the same bed as a man you've just had consensual sex with is not the consent implied?


----------------------------
As per usual I got someone hiding behind the anonymity of the rep system to neg rep me with a snide remark:

Too bad more often than not those cases are about some dickhead taking advantage of a chick that blacked out. Which is still rape, you ignorant fuck.

If by that you mean someone who's gone to a party, had a few too many, gone off to sleep it off, then someone's snuck in the room and hopped her... I don't think I said that wasn't rape - its practically the same as the woman walking through a dark park, yet different enough to not be the same.

I have about as much sympathy for them as I do people that get mushed by trains at level crossings or gamblers that lose everything, sure its a tragedy but its a completely unavoidable one.

The grand majority of people go perfectly well through life without taking stupid risks, or going vastly beyond their limits - most people manage not to drink themselves stupid into a coma.

No I'm not saying that people that take advantage of other people when they're in a compromised state shouldn't be arrested, they should, what I am saying is people shouldn't be getting shit faced and then going "Woe is me I'm the victim, I'm absolved of all responsibilities"



Think of it this way: if someone gets drunk, passes out in the middle of the road and gets splattered quarter of a mile down the road because a freight truck has gone over them - who would you blame? The victim or the driver?

 

[Mamono Assault Force]

Re: In today's news...

I have a solution for all this.

All of humanity gets together, and agrees not to be stupid assholes.

You're welcome, World.

 

[Courage Wolf]

Re: In today's news...

Is that really rape? Abuse of trust sure, but when you're in the same bed as a man you've just had consensual sex with is not the consent implied?

Yes, that's Rape. Engaging in Sexual acts against a sleeping person who cannot by the very nature of that status of being, give consent, is Rape. It's in black and white in both federal and state laws.

If by that you mean someone who's gone to a party, had a few too many, gone off to sleep it off, then someone's snuck in the room and hopped her... I don't think I said that wasn't rape - its practically the same as the woman walking through a dark park, yet different enough to not be the same.

I have about as much sympathy for them as I do people that get mushed by trains at level crossings or gamblers that lose everything, sure its a tragedy but its a completely unavoidable one.

The grand majority of people go perfectly well through life without taking stupid risks, or going vastly beyond their limits - most people manage not to drink themselves stupid into a coma.

No I'm not saying that people that take advantage of other people when they're in a compromised state shouldn't be arrested, they should, what I am saying is people shouldn't be getting shit faced and then going "Woe is me I'm the victim, I'm absolved of all responsibilities"



Think of it this way: if someone gets drunk, passes out in the middle of the road and gets splattered quarter of a mile down the road because a freight truck has gone over them - who would you blame? The victim or the driver?

Yes again. The Truck Driver is in fact, Guilty of Manslaughter, for a few reasons. Notably that a truck driver is responsible for the speed, direction, and path his vehicle takes, there's no exception to this.

As for trains, trains cannot stop in time.

Don't take risky behavior is all well and good, it will protect you 99 times out of 100. But don't lay accusatory blame at a victims feet, instead use that knowledge to look out for yourself and others. That's a community responsibility as well as a personal one.

It seems moreso that your argument is aimed at media coverage, which you could have addressed without ever entering such a topic and immediately making enemies where you didn't need to do so.

The Media is a propaganda machine, in every country, all around the world. If you want to lay blame at the media's feet for making people out to be guilty when they are in fact innocent? That's fine, it's wrong and outright abhorrent. However, it's something only a few people have control over.

As for the vast majority making it through life without making stupid choices? I can personally attest that isn't the case, and most make it through life Blindly due to Luck. Being in the right places at the right times to avoid trauma. More luck to them, honestly, I wish such things on no one and I'm so cynical I make people around me question every action I take.

In the face of Law, Written Law, and Law carried out, opinions matter almost not at all except those of the judges and detectives involved. Innocent men go to jail at times, and monsters walk free.

So as a society we put people in charge of these laws to handle them, however, police have no obligation to protect you. Ever, it's federal law here in the U.S. at least. So it's up to the society to do so. You want to make a difference in such tragedies, then take that responsibility on with more then just a facebook campaign or words.

 

[Unknown Squid]

Re: In today's news...

Yes again. The Truck Driver is in fact, Guilty of Manslaughter, for a few reasons. Notably that a truck driver is responsible for the speed, direction, and path his vehicle takes, there's no exception to this.

No one is trying to deny or remove any amount of blame or guilt from the rapist, nor trying to pass any kind of conviction over to the victim. It's simply common sense though, not to lay down in the middle of dark roads. As MrMe also mentioned, that's not even the typical kind of situation involved regardless, but there's still countless incidents that could have been avoided entirely with some common sense.

This is why many anti rape and victim support organisations put so much effort into trying to pro-actively prevent rapes from happening in the first place, by educating young girls on how not to put themselves into needless risk.

It would be great if the world was a place where everyone could keep their life savings stored on their front lawn, and trust that no one would take advantage. But pointing out that you probably shouldn't, isn't trying to suggest that it would be acceptable to steal it.

 

[Hopeyouguess62]

Re: In today's news...

Theres a good reason why rape accusations are met with such scrutiny, the sheer amount of false accusations makes the conviction process a legal mine field.

When people think rape you think of a stalker ambushing some girl on a dark path in a park or dragged into an alley way, but actually the majority of 'rapes' are actually between people that know each other.

Valid points. But the scrutiny of the victim in determining if consent was given should be limited to areas such as a history of perjury, fraud, or other deceit. To question the victim's sexual history, dress, or activities that night (beyond determining the accuracy of testimony) suggest that consent is automatically given because a person is sexually active or inebriated or likes to show off his/her body.

Generally its a case of the girl gets pissed as a fart, gets flirty with some guy or the guy flirts with her and one thing leads to another, they fuck, she wakes up and feels ashamed because a lot of women still see the stigma that if they're 'easy' they're sluts, or she's not satisfied maybe has a sore twat from the pounding, and so ends up accusing the guy of rape and ruins his life because so many people are stupid fucks that believe that just because a guy is accused of raping a woman he is automatically guilty.
See the Duke College incident from a few years back and the media hype around it for how fecktarded and demonising rape acussations are.

When you say "generally," do you mean to say that you have statistical evidence that this is the majority of sexual assault cases? Show me the numbers.

I know that there ARE people out there who make wrongful accusations of rape. With that said, some fraternities specialize (though not so much today as in previous decades) in getting women drunk for the sole purpose of using their inebriated state to have sex with them. From a legal standpoint, this is rape. The women are drinking at the frat house, and the fraternity as host AND alcohol provider should be ensuring that they get home safely (and not sexed up, if inebriated). The drinks they serve are often "hooch" consisting of fruit, sweet drink flavoring, and a high percentage of alcohol. It's a sweet drink that gets people drunk very quickly, without tasting very strong. "Hooch" is the alcoholic equivalent of a date-rape drug.

I would advise women to stay away from fraternity houses in general, because I'm familiar with cases exactly as I just described. But should a woman be foolish enough to fall for these lures, it is STILL rape. Yes, idiots can still be raped. Yes, the rapists should still be punished.

Think of it this way: if someone gets drunk, passes out in the middle of the road and gets splattered quarter of a mile down the road because a freight truck has gone over them - who would you blame? The victim or the driver?

If you really can't tell the difference between a truck driver accidentally hitting a person that he couldn't see in time, and someone shoving their cock into a person who's in no state to give consent, then you haven't been paying attention. It would be a closer analogy if the truck driver were to serve someone several drinks, then leave them in the middle of the road, and then run over them with the truck. They might even back over the body a few times just to be thorough.

No one is trying to deny or remove any amount of blame or guilt from the rapist, nor trying to pass any kind of conviction over to the victim. It's simply common sense though, not to lay down in the middle of dark roads. As MrMe also mentioned, that's not even the typical kind of situation involved regardless, but there's still countless incidents that could have been avoided entirely with some common sense.

This is why many anti rape and victim support organisations put so much effort into trying to pro-actively prevent rapes from happening in the first place, by educating young girls on how not to put themselves into needless risk.

It would be great if the world was a place where everyone could keep their life savings stored on their front lawn, and trust that no one would take advantage. But pointing out that you probably shouldn't, isn't trying to suggest that it would be acceptable to steal it.

I work in an organization that assists sexual assault victims and with training people in how to avoid these situations (it's a secondary duty for me). I agree with what you're saying. No one is 100% safe, but there are practices that keep people out of harm's way. But that's beside the point. My initial point, which somehow became controversial, is that no matter how stupid the victim's actions might have been, the rapist is still a criminal.

 

[OAMP]

Re: In today's news...

Ever hear of the German word Backpfeifengesicht? It roughly means "a face in need of punching". Now, we all know how German words can be constructed, and how valid this word is exactly can be questioned, but that's not the point. The argument being made by some basically amounts to the same thing as if I punched someone who was really ugly, saying while I'm wrong, maybe the other person should have such an ugly face.

Now now, OAMP, you might say, those are two completely separate and unrelated things, and your example is quite ludicrous! Really? Not quite. You see, while there may indeed be some risky behaviors young people take, and they could perhaps change their behavior, if your face is ugly there are also things you can do to make it less ugly, and thus less likely to be punched by me. Also, you can be rest assured, people do get randomly punched in the face, all the time. By drunk people more often than not, in fact, which is another thing these hypothetical face punchers have in common with rapists. However, if the police were called after someone randomly got punched in face you, you can bet your mother's wedding ring that no one would be blaming the person with the ugly face, in the slightest.

The thing is, too, even if for a moment we entertain the notion that there's all this prevention that can, and maybe should have been done... SO WHAT. When dealing with the situation, it isn't some conversation like this, it's after the fact, when acts have occurred. Someone did something very criminal and the other did not. Go get the fucking criminal. This isn't some stupid public opinion media circus, this is work for the justice system. You are entitled to your opinion, but that doesn't mean your opinion is helpful or productive. While I'll admit, it's to a very minor degree considering the range of what is covered by the charge, in my opinion questioning whether or not people should have been in risky situations to begin with is almost an obstruction of justice, because it's just throwing red herrings into the works. This is not to be confused with ignoring due process. As someone who hangs around with a lot of lawyers and law school candidates, you're darn tooting I enjoy due process This is about exactly what everyone said. We don't excuse the rapist in any way, but... NO BUTS. You get the person, get them on the stand, confirm that it was them, and that it did happen, and then there is no excuse. End of story.

 

[Master_Bei_Shun]

Re: In today's news...

however, police have no obligation to protect you

I just find it hilarious that nobody's slapped Police station with False Advertising lawsuit yet...

That "To Protect and Serve" decal should be replaced with "To uphold the laws and statutes of this particular territory"

Thats like a Dominos delivery car with "Pizza in 60 seconds or it's free!" on their car...

 

[Caulder]

Re: In today's news...

You must be registered to see the links

TL;DR, Republicans are already trying to axe Net Neutrality and the FCC's recent efforts to classify broadband as a Title II telecommunications resource. Don't you just love the two-party system?

 

[OAMP]

Re: In today's news...

Being in the field that I'm in, I get more than my fair share of messages regarding politics, and just as a coincidence some of those I know from college that are still very active in politics took net neutrality on as their personal issue. There's one I could write books about, but suffice to say, he literally stayed up night and day when SOPA came around the first time handing out flyers against it, sitting in the student union and talking to passers-by, and starting a rather large letter writing campaign. Now, only a few short years later, he's spamming that net neutrality is the work of "evil socialists". There's a reason he's on my list to watch for humor, and not to seriously debate, heh.

 

[Unknown Squid]

Re: In today's news...

My local news.

You must be registered to see the links

 

[dmronny]

Re: In today's news...

Interesting, and here I thought the American police were over-militarized. What do they use for patrol cars, challenger 2's.

 

[MrMe]

Re: In today's news...

My local news.

You must be registered to see the links

Got to admit they fooled me for a bit, would not suprise me if RAF cutbacks resulted in them selling their choppers - though it would surprise me if police forces could buy them with their cutbacks