Rape apologism (not a real word, sorry) on a MN thread!(227 Posts)
Sorry - a thread about a thread, but I feel that input is needed from as many people as possible, to counter some of the ridiculous things one particular poster is saying. The woman the thread is about was so drunk she was blacking out, can't remember what happened, but is sore, so is pretty sure she had sex - and someone is saying this doesn't mean she was raped!
I don't see much evidence of the blaming the rape victim on here, which is where we are transacting the discussion.
At no point in the alternative scenario did I blame the woman. You've made that up to bolster your argument. I've merely suggested that it is possible he thought she was lucid enough to make an informed decision. That isn't blaming her. But if true, it would absolve him.
I have not made up one sided stories blaming the woman, but you however have accepted a one sided story blaming the man! Why?
Erm ... your posts are blaming the rape victim.
You making up little stories where you pretend maybe she consented but forgot, and that that would make it somehow 'not rape' - that would be blaming the victim.
I'm not blaming the man - I don't know what happened. But I do know when a scenario is rape and when it is not. You obviously don't, or you have a vested interest in pretending rape isn't rape.
I've told my DS that if a woman is very drunk he shouldn't have sex with her because she may not be in a fit condition to give informed consent and that is the lowest legal and moral barrier he should consider acceptable as a human being.
I'm not bringing him up to be a rapist Brenslo. He knows that if he has penetrative sex with a ragingly drunk woman, he may be committing rape. If he doesn't want to be arrested the next day, he shouldn't do it. Same as driving - if he's had too much to drink, he'll lose his licence if he drives and gets caught.
I think you might be hard of reading. Go back thru my posts and find one instance where I blame the woman, if you can. And saying I have a vested interest in pretending rape isn't rape just shows that you have run out of arguments. I do however have a vested interest in exploring all sides of an interesting (from a discussion / legal point of view) situation. Trying not to let my pre conceived prejudices of favouring the woman get in the way of objectivity.
I am not making up any stories about her maybe giving consent and forgetting. As I understand it, she is unable to say if she gave consent or not. So it's a possibility, by her own admission.
Oh, bless you.
No, I'm not 'hard of reading,' thank you dear.
I have already explained why your rape myths blame women. Read again if you don't understand, and then if you still don't understand, MN has a good and simple explanation of rape myths.
There is absolutely no 'side' to claiming that it's ok for a man to rape a woman who's so drunk she is incapable of consenting. If she's unable to say if she gave consent, because she was too drunk, she was too drunk to consent. It's very, very, very simple.
Or do you drink-drive, too?
Most of your posts have been deleted Brenslo. Wonder why? You certainly created some scenario where she consented despite the fact she said she couldn't remember what happened. If you drink so much you can't remember you are too drunk to consent. But as Basil said that is a really low bar for a man to have.
I find it interesting that you immediately went to the law as if a conviction or whether the CPS would prosecute determines whether a rape took place. It doesn't btw, in case you're wondering.
If a woman is going in and out of consciousness, what sensible person would give any weight to anything they said during a brief moment of consciousness, Brenslo? If they slurred, "I really, really lurve you and I wanna marry you" would you be expecting to post the banns/book he Registry Office the next day? Of course you wouldn't!
Someone that drunk wouldn't be allowed to consent to a surgical procedure, or to give evidence in court, or make a police statement - so how could their consent to sex be valid?
And really. What are men doing having sex with women that drunk?
brenslo as you are interested in this from 'a legal point of view' you might find the CPS guidance on consent valuable reading
(it suggests how drunkenness can vitiate consent in this sort of situation)
Oh, thank goodness.
So let me get this straight, in my own mind.
A man wakes up the morning after a drunken night out, and next to him in bed is a woman he doesn't recognise, who is smiling at him and saying "good morning tiger."
On the face of it, you'd agree that this poor chap appears to have been the victim of a serious sexual assault.
"If a woman is going in and out of consciousness, what sensible person would give any weight to anything they said during a brief moment of consciousness"
If the man was also drunk what makes you think that his thinking was any more sensible, coherent or lucid than hers? And yet he is expected to do the thinking and the rationalising for both of them?
I have been the drunk woman in this scenario, I have found myself in situations I wish I hadn't got into, but in all-but-one of those situations, the man was also drunk and I would not have expected him to be able to judge just how drunk he thought I was or to notice whether I was 'blacking out' or just having a little nap in between times.
I was irresponsible to get so drunk that I wasn't aware of my surroundings, but I was with other stupid drunk people, some of whom were men. That didn't give anyone the right to penetrate me against my will, but if my will at the time was to go for it, even if I didn't remember afterwards, then that should not be called rape.
I'm not some hairy handed trucker, just someone trying to see both sides, but as far as I can see, it is not a man's responsibility to police a woman's sex drive and decide if she really wants sex or not, or to make judgment calls based on what he thinks she wants rather than what she is showing him and telling him that she wants. If no means no then why doesn't yes mean yes?
Is 'blacking out' memory loss the next day, black spots in memory. Or drifting in and out of a sleep state?
DoingItForMyself Thu 05-Dec-13 15:55:03
I'm not some hairy handed trucker, just someone trying to see both sides,
DIFM, on this thread, trying to see it from both sides makes you a victim blaming rape apologist.
Here's an interesting one I heard recently - true but won't reveal how I heard as I don't want to make it identifiable - but two individuals were caught having sex, one with advanced dementia, and the police were called in case it was rape/assault. The decision was they couldn't prosecute as there was no way of knowing whether the individual had consented but didn't remember afterwards.
Can't work out what I think about that one. I think I agree that you can't just say anyone with dementia or any mental health issues can't have sex, but of course the potential for abuse in that situation is so high.
But how could it possibly be 'seeing it from both sides' to argue that if a woman is too drunk to consent, it doesn't matter?!
Because I cannot follow how you are saying anything else.
If anyone - male or female - is having sex, they have a basic duty to check whether the other person is consenting happily and is capable of giving consent (eg., is not pissed out of their mind, underage, etc.).
I don't see why you think this would be different if a man woke up to someone who'd taken advantage? You imagine men would somehow feel differently from women? This is one of the biggest myths around, that men somehow don't get traumatized.
If someone stabbed someone else while they were drunk and had no knowledge of doing so, would he not have committed the crime?
Ah, but that's not the point basil.
What if someone were drunk, and got stabbed? Maybe they asked for it. Who knows? Maybe they simply forgot that they really wanted a good stabbing.
How drunk does a man have to be, not to notice that his sexual partner is unconscious part of the time?
On a general level, I have told my sons that being so drunk you don't know what you are doing, is a very, very bad idea - because they could end up getting into hazardous or bad situations or could end up being the hazard for others (by drunk driving, for example). I have also told them specifically that I think it is not a good idea to have sex if they are drunk, and that they should NOT have sex with a partner who is drunk.
DoingItForMyself - this thread was inspired by a story on another forum, where a woman who was very drunk, was taken away from her friends on the street by a total stranger, who took her back to his home, and had sex with her - despite her being so drunk she can't remember what happened, doesn't remember the sex (but is sore) - and on that forum, people are telling her that this was not rape. It wasn't a case of two drunk people having sex, after meeting at a bar or a party, it was an abduction and rape, and it beggars belief that anyone would try to argue that it was anything less.
The onus is on the man not to rape, not on the woman not be raped. Men don't rape because they are drunk. They rape because they have a sense of entitlement to stick their penis in a woman whether she wants it or not. That sense of entitlement is there before they are drunk. It doesn't just magically appear when they are drunk. They may be more inclined to act on it when drunk. The vast vast majority of rapes are planned. Drink may help that plan along.
If the woman is sober and the man is drunk the onus is still on the man not to rape the woman. If both are drunk then the onus is still on the man to not rape the woman. I don't understand why people don't get this? Is it because you don't want men to take responsibility for their actions?
The stabbing analogy is beyond daft, because people tend not to happily enjoy and consent to being stabbed, sober or drunk. If someone is stabbed when drunk, then it's pretty obvious they didn't consent to it, regardless of their memory of the event. Sex, unlike stabbing, is something people do consent to.
People tend not to enjoy being raped, sober or drunk.
Amazed that is news to you.
Or are you one of the 'oh, rape is just sex as a surprise!' band?
Bren, do you realise that your last post gives the impression that you equate rape with sex ?
Sex, unlike stabbing, is something people do consent to. but I just can't help thinking of R v Brown (93? ish) and how people can (but can't) consent to that sort of thing Brenslo
Join the discussion
Please login first.