Facebook supports rape?

Shall we all stop for some gin?

Hmm, well, you managed to respond to those posts absolutely fine while ignoring the apology, but I suppose it's better late than never.

Thank you.

No KRIT, course you don't patronise. Just me being paranoid, silly me!

Yes, sorry, I see that now SQ.

I should have said, I feel that this thread is not the place for people to shout at others about what rapists are like. No matter who's doing the shouting or being shouted at. Some people have shared very personal feelings and experiences and I think it is not the right place to get shouty.

Go on SQ, don't tell them that I apologised - twice.
It was a stupid error on my part that I will now be slated for again and again and again.

Ella, I haven't seen those. If you apologised for anything then please take it that your apologies are accepted wholeheartedly and with thanks.

ella I haven't given any information on this thread about my personal life as far as I can remember.

Rhubarb has hazarded a guess that I have been raped, and then further postulated that it was a partner wot dunnit.

So she might not only be mis-charaterising my "rape" - it might be a rape that hasn't even happened.

Maybe I am upset because a family member was attacked, or a friend.

Or are some people on this thread Psychic?

Dears? Love? What's that all about? Do you hear anyone else using patronising terms about other posters here.

(FFS - step away from the mouse, this is getting silly.)

rhubarb - the posts where I said 'sorry'. Funnily enough.

KRI, course I do, I love this, I really do.
Whatever you say dears.

Capital letters = shouting. Basic netiquette.

chibi - I think that's about it, yes!

I think proles's point about how, in a better society that we're working towards, these characteristics would be obvious, is very important too.

• not to suggest that I have had hot dinners on other discussion boards, although a few fellow boardies have made me virtual coffee before! :0

chibi, because I keep being asked to justify their very existence.
Ella - what apologies?
I am not shouting, just making sure you get the point loud and clear so there can be no confusion.

Rhubarb, with respect, I think you have singled yourself out. You used shouty capitals, you've repeatedly taken disagreements with your view as personal attacks. One could be forgiven for wondering if you have said quite provocative and at times insensitive things in the knowledge that others would challenge you, and that you could label those challenges as personal attacks, or "tearing you apart."

I've seen this more times than I've had hot dinners on other discussion boards.

Have been reading the thread

have i got this right

Rapists share characteristics, but these wouldn't be apparent to a victim, who definitely should not have been expected to identify them as rapists prior to being assaulted

so these imperceptible characteristics that no one could be expected to see, why is it so important to go on about them, reaffirming their existence

We might as well insist all rapists have enlarged pancreases for all the good it does anyone in terms of knowing whether or not they are unlucky enough to be in the company of a rapist

'I was offended and shocked by what I perceived others were saying about ordinary men being rapists. '

For the final time: No, we said it the other way around. You are reversing the position. This is bad logic. Why is this so hard to understand?!

Would this be the moment to point out you've totally ignored my apologies?

Shouting at someone because they have objected to the way you characterised their rape is not great, btw.

KRITIQ it is very simple. I was offended and shocked by what I perceived others were saying about ordinary men being rapists.

I said that in my mind rapists were evil bastards. Socially dysfunctional. The point I was making is that they could not be further from an ordinary man in my opinion.

Then someone mentioned that actually acquaintance rapists could appear to be the average man in the street. I conceded that point but argued that criminal profiling does seem to show that even domestic abusers fit some kind of profile - that was to argue that rapists are NOT average Joe, but that they are different, because they choose to rape whereas some men do not.

As others have made points I have disagree with some and conceded others as is normal. But once again I am singled out. So fuck this, I'm off to have a glass of wine so feel free to tear me apart as that is what you seem to be best at. So long as you feel better that no-one could actually disagree with you.

I WAS TALKING MAINLY ABOUT WHAT I PERCEIVED TO BE STRANGER RAPE AND I WAS NOT DEFINING DATE RAPE, THAT CAME UP LATER AND I CONCEDED THE POINT THAT WAS MADE THAT THOSE CHARACTERISTICS CANNOT BE USED TO DESCRIBE ACQUAINTANCE RAPE.

You know what? Have it. Have the point you want to make.

I knew I had upset you. I apologised. Yes I did wonder whether you were upset because you were a rape victim but did I use that to justify myself? How absurd. That is like taking an apology and merely throwing it back in someone's face. Like Custy said, never apologise, it's a waste of time.

I find the view that ordinary men can all be rapists offensive and shocking.

Yes rapists do have characteristics that are selfish and sexist. You don't believe that so you prefer to call me someone who perpetuates a rape myth?

You have done wonders for your argument, you really have. Well done.

It is a 2 day argument to those of us lucky enough never to have been raped. It's an ongoing fact of life for everyone else. I'm lucky I have the luxury not to have to think about what a rapist is like all the time. If I had been raped, I probably wouldn't have that luxury.

Rhubarb, to be completely frank, you have made what come across as very "absolute" statements in many of your posts, although some of these then contradict. SQ isn't the only person here who is confused and would like for you to clarify what you genuinely believe about rape.

It's not about who apologised to whom, it's not about taking things out of context, it's not about asking people to read back 10 pages and then chiding them for doing so. Seriously, I don't understand what you are saying here.

"You admit we were talking about general rapists and at that point no-one had mentioned date rape. "

WHAT?

You apologised to me for upsetting me, after hazarding guesses about my personal life to explain why I might be upset.

You did not apologise for your original posts or acknowledge that they could be taken in a way by victims reading them that might be terribly upsetting.

You have still not adequately explained whether you really stand by what you said, you say that you stand by your posts and yet when asked to confirm what you mean you change the wording.

Incidentally I think that what you have done on this thread constitutes very bad form. Guessing about whether other people have been raped or not and in what circumstances - in order to justify them being upset - rather than considering that actually it's your posts that may have caused upset... That is definitely bad form in my book.

What do you want me to say SQ? Really?

Once again you like to take what I said out of context. You admit we were talking about general rapists and at that point no-one had mentioned date rape.

All of the above you have taken out of context.

I am not answering someone who refuses to accept an apology and who re-hashes a 2 day old argument.

There are no qualifiers like "most", "many", "in my opinion" etc in your posts BTW. They are black and white.