Nick Ross on rape - warning you may feel the need to punch a wall

[DuelingFanjo]

sorry it's a daily mail link.

I am full of rage, particularly his comments on aggravated rape. Wtf. Presumably he means that there are situations in which he will not be able to stop himself from raping someone because it is aggravated. This has made me so angry. Please they'll me he no longer works for the BBC. I truly hope he loses his career over this. How the hell are we supposed to educate people who think like this?

minnehaha, I know what it was like to be dragged into an alleyway and raped at the age of 17. I know what it was like to be told by his barrister that I was a loose woman who liked rough sex. I know what it was like to see him serve just 4 years in prison. I know what it is like to be terrified that he knows where I live.

So perhaps you could fuck off with your assumptions, and when you get there, fuck off some more?

oh Minnie - I worked for almost 15 years for my local Rape Crisis - I know a fuck of a lot - I am also a woman and I know other women - do I win

oh the lovely minnehaha
in trochee did minnehaha
fuck off into twigs and pebbles

Minnehaha you know 'jack shit' yourself about the life experiences of anyone on this thread.

Do fuck off.

Nicely done, line.

There was a decent discussion of this issue on Radio 4 this afternoon, with much more nuance.

I find this thread disappointing, no one seems to have read what he said, only one viewpoint seems to be allowed and anything else gets howled down.

Odd. I think it's pretty clear that most people have read what he said.

I have just caught up with this thread.

What the fuck is Minnie on about? Someone is obviously high.

I decided to try to read the article again but I'm just fed up of this 'blame anyone and anything but the rapist' articles and beliefs most people have.

You can tell by the 'writing style'?

Tell what? That I won't let go of my thoughts that as a woman who has been raped many times, as a child, as a teenager, and as an adult, I don't have to sit back and say nothing whilst rape apologists like Nick Ross make out that I'm no different to a fucking laptop, and that if I am on view, then men can't help but stick their penis into my vagina or anus?

That's funny, here was I thinking that it is the fault of RAPISTS that I have been raped.

I'm sooooo glad I have minniehaha and Nick Ross to put me straight...

I think I know only too well, minihaha, of what I speak. I've fucking LIVED it, as a child, as a teenager, as an adult. Have YOU?

I'm not sure 'minnie' is a true poster.

Can i say that? Not hunting! Just an opinion.

I'm glad I haven't read the article.

DuellingFanjo, that only works on mine in a text box.

There was a decent discussion of this issue on Radio 4 this afternoon, with much more nuance

What ARE these nuances surrounding non-consensual sex that people keep talking about? And why is rape THE ONLY FUCKING CRIME that is so endlessly fucking "nuanced"? Murder never seems to be nuanced. Neither does fraud. We seldom hear pleas to take a more "balanced" view of carjacking or mugging. But rape is different, apparently.

"And why is rape THE ONLY FUCKING CRIME that is so endlessly fucking "nuanced"? Murder never seems to be nuanced. Neither does fraud. We seldom hear pleas to take a more "balanced" view of carjacking or mugging"

Actually the reverse is true, nearly all other crimes, certainly all major ones, are "nuanced".

This morons idiotic ramblings remind me of the Chris Morris, ' good ' AIDS, ' bad ' AIDS sketch. I would wonder why he loathes women so much, but I can't be arsed.

Couthy, my grandma had a great saying "there's no use arguing with a born idiot". It springs to mind here.

Nick Ross is a twunt with a book to sell. Anyone agreeing with his points are just twunts.

The problem with the article is that it does make three important points that should be in bold but instead thay are diminished and equivocated:

"None of this diminishes the horror of domestic abuse, especially when it is repeated, severe and one-sided. Women do tend to come off worst, and a small proportion of them suffer relentlessly."

Fact. The number of women killed and severely injured by men far outweighs the number of men killed and severely injured by women.

"Rape is one of the most violating crimes. Victims tend to feel dirty, embarrassed, racked with revulsion and self-blame, and, since it almost always involves a male assailant,...."

Fact. Only a man is capable of raping as women cannot rape anyone.

"Rape victims were once treated appallingly, as though it was all their fault, but have we now gone too far the other way?"

Fact. The police and criminal prosection service have acknowledged this and have said more needs to be done.

The problem with the article is that the rest of it is nuance and quibbling over statistics and far far less important than the 3 basic facts as stated above.

It is classic MRA style! "Sex trafficking is said to be a growing problem; but how much is voluntary rather than duress?" TAKEN FROM THE ACTUAL CHAPTER - WTF

How do some people go through life and end up with LESS common sense than they must have been born with??? Will be complaining to BBC about Nick Ross too, that article was sickening and there's no nuances to debate, it's not a case of one opinion against another, he's just plainly wrong and dangerously wrong too.

Stupid comparing someone's body and freedom to a laptop or bags of cash - property is a case of possession so you are expected to try and hold onto your goods/money if you can but even if you make a mistake it's still counted as theft. But people aren't possessions so that analogy is shite! A much better comparison is murder - you can ask someone to murder you, you can draw up a contract saying you'd desperately like them to murder you thanks very much yet if they do it it's still murder and they're still at fault so why can't everyone see this applies to rape? You can dress how you want, you could ask someone to rape you if you wanted but they're still not entitled to do it. Really don't get how in this day and age that's such a difficult concept to grasp - unless you're a complete immoral tosser who still believes deep down that sex is an asset/possession you can feel free to steal if someone's not protecting it well enough.

"But, thank you Lazeyjane for once again repeating your belief that most women are liars. It warms the cockles to see you trot that line out all the time"

Exaggeration, much? If anything it's a small group of people on here continually howling down any other views.

Actually what NR is picking up is not stuff he made up, he is just repeating research done by others, recording many other womens' views. So in a way, you are the one saying other women are liars.

What I am trying to understand is just why there is such a visceral reaction to this on MN. I see grays in every other area of life, I see grays here too, yet for some reason this area apparently only has blacks and whites and anyone who dares disagree is howled down.

I have been very worried by a number of muggings and other violent crimes perpetrated against men recently. It seems to me that we need to take this seriously and think carefully about how these crimes can be avoided in the future.

First of all, it seems very clear that these men would not have been attacked if they had not happened to be in that particular area at that particular time.

It would therefore seem obvious that our first step needs to be to teach men to keep safe by restricting their freedom of movement and making sure they are never out unescorted during the hours of darkness. Of course it is regrettable that these violent criminals should exist but as this is clearly beyond remedy, our first step must be to ensure that the potential victims do their part in staying safe. This measure will of course not only restrict men's social lives, but also the range of jobs they are able to do, but this is unavoidable: unless the potential victims do their part, we can never hope for a solution.

Secondly, we need to consider if there was not something about the victims which attracted the attention of the perpetrators. Did they perhaps look like the kind of men who might have a wallet on them? Anything like a smart suit or a new briefcase is a clear signal to any potential mugger; in fact, it could be construed as a clear invitation to any criminal with low impulse control. After all, if you would put your laptop out of view in your car and not put your sound system on view in your window, how can it be reasonable to advertise your whole person as a source of potential pickings?

Thirdly, the victim's demeanour is an important part of this equation. Signs of drunkenness clearly denote an easy target and might even be taken as evidence of a man who will not greatly care about being mugged. Any investigation into a mugging should therefore take its departure in establishing what can be known about the victim's demeanour and general vulnerability as this is clearly the nub of the entire case.

No-one is 'howling', Lazyjaney. People are posting. Writing words.