"Rape...is not caused by rapists" WTF!?!

[Unacceptable]

If you aren't aware of the rapist Brock Turner and the campaigners who think he's getting a hard time, have a read of this guardian link.

AIBU to think that the statement from Leslie Rassmussen decrying political correctness that harms poor boys like Brock is the dumbest piece of shit I've ever read?

Even in their drunkest, most ridiculous states my Husband, Brothers and adult sons would not rape a woman because, and I'm sure Leslie wouldn't want to entertain this notion, they wouldn't rape somebody because they aren't rapists!!!!

Brock clearly is.
Having sex without consent is rape.
Forcing yourself upon an unconscious person is rape.

You don't have to be a stranger in a dark alley to do that, just your normal, average, everyday twat.

I know it is hard to accept the wrongdoings of a loved one.
I know we'd all fight to protect those we care about but you can still fucking accept the mistakes that people make...even if you can't get your head around it, don't bury your head in the sand and pretend it's less of an abuse because 'he's a nice guy'.
When will people wake the fuck up?

Link: gu.com/p/4kk46/stw

Digital penetration vaginally and anally is rape.

It's not false.

Elsie, he isn't convicted of rape so I'm not sure digital penetration is (it's not in England)

I'm happy referring to him as a rapist, he was convicted of three serious sexual assault charges and we don't trouble about calling someone a thug

It is he is not convicted of rape, to call him so is slander, mumsnet is allowing his name to be defamed here.

..if it was abh not gbh

Report the thread if you like, naryjo

Then report the thread to MN.

Ooh look.

USA Today

Australia. And a Liar

FBI new definition of Rape - as per 2013...

"The FBI has implemented an important change in the definition of rape that is used in the collection of national crime statistics. PERF has been working to keep its members apprised of how this change will affect local police agencies.

Following is a set of questions asked by jurisdictions and answers the FBI provided to PERF:

"Q: In 2012, the Department of Justice announced a change to the definition of Rape for the Uniform Crime Reporting Program’s (UCR) Summary Reporting System (Summary). How does the new definition differ from the old one?

A: The old definition was “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” Many agencies interpreted this definition as excluding a long list of sex offenses that are criminal in most jurisdictions, such as offenses involving oral or anal penetration, penetration with objects, and rapes of males.

The new Summary definition of Rape is: “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

Last time I looked, a finger was part of the body - this young woman didn't consent to the finger - therefore rape.

It's on the US FBI website.

I think we're safe...

Mumsnet don't normally delete stuff that is already freely available in the world's media. At least that's what they've told me in the past.

I doubt it would count as slander and deformation as I can't see any harm to his reputation, which is mud already.

Perhaps you should focus on the harm done to his victim,hmmm?

Thanks,knock

Interesting to see the FBI definition, that hopefully provides some clarification.

Funnily enough, Mumsnet "In the News" section refers to him as a "rapist" in their fourth bullet down at the moment.

Pursuing these semantics will not help him or change anyone's opinion of him or what he did.

The doting father gave his son the best of educations.
He presumably saw his son as someone who would be a great success in life and looked up to by all.

Yet he does not see that his son was acting despicably by having sex with a completely drunk girl he met at a party. Once, without even needing to think of law per se, or consent, a man who considered himself decent just would not have done this. Only a cad would.

Of course it happened before, but it happens time after time now. When did doing this ever come to be considered fine by so many undergraduate's at elite universities?
Here is another similar horror story.
medium.com/thelist/i-was-raped-at-oxford-university-police-pressured-me-into-dropping-charges-30d37d25efa0#

Just seen that, 80Kgirl.

It's like someone being tagged 'the Dulwich Burglar' in media, and someone coming on and saying, well strictly, he wasn't convicted of burglary, only breaking and entering. That would be similarly dickish behaviour.

From what I gather, there was not enough physical evidence to convict him of rape, but of course that does not mean he didn't rape her.
When the Swedish men on bicycles rode past Turner, he was on top of the victim 'thrusting' her. I believe he raped her, piv, though I accept legally he is not convicted of that. But I also count his fingers as rape. At the very least, we know for certain that he used his fingers, inserted pine needles into her body, and attempted/intended to rape her. So I feel quite comfortable describing him as a rapist.
I don't give a fuck about defamation of his name or his reputation. He's a victim blaming lying sex offender. As if also technically being convicted of rape could make him a worse person than he is.

I've said this once and I'll say it again.

Even if someone is running around naked. Even if someone is blackout drunk.
Even if someone is passed out.

It doesn't give anyone a right to have sex or grope them.

If you rape. You are a rapist.
"20 minutes of action"
I don't care if it was 20 hours or 20 seconds. He is a rapist. He needs to be locked away.

the grey area simply doesn't exist between strangers

Why is that, Mrs Hathaway? Are you referring to the scenario in which two strangers won't have the same understanding of each other's body language, meaning that they are likely to talk to each other about what's happening more? If so, I don't think this is always the case. The reality is that for many strangers having sex, it's a one night stand where passion/lust means there's less talking. I'm not saying that is how it should be, BTW. But it's more likely to be a frantic, disjointed, alcohol-fuelled affair which lends itself to assumptions being made around consent, rather than asking questions.

I think a lot of posters are confident about saying what they do and don't want and are past the college stage. They are likely to be full, confident participants in sexual encounters. I find it very difficult to imagine posters on this thread being slow to say 'no' out of sheer social awkwardness. Or feeling caught up in an escalating sexual situation for complicated psychological reasons (such as shyness or fear of looking silly). I can't imagine them being a half-hearted participant in something they will afterwards regret.

Sparrowhawk (love your username) you say that NT adults don't get caught up in misunderstandings but for some people, especially when younger, romantic and sexual encounters can be prolonged exercises in confusion, failed attempts at mind-reading, saying what you don't mean, doing what you don't want, and trying to avoid rejection at all costs. Very sadly, I have known many girls who have seen sexual encounters as a necessary evil that I very much doubt they either encouraged or actually tried to stop. For many young women who think it's the only way to 'keep a man', sex is often not a happy, enthusiastic business at all but this doesn't mean it isn't consensual. I agree with you that women shouldn't have to feel this way and it's frustrated that they do.

I actually don't think it's too much to ask that men ensure 100% that they have consent every single time they have sex.

So you are saying that unless men verbally ask for consent every time they have sex, it's rape? Or how far are you taking that?

In response to your question about my own experiences sparrowhawk - not that it is extensive - I went along with it because I wanted to be with someone rather than alone. Isn't that a stupid reason? But there you go. Yes, I know for a fact that the people in question would have been horrified if they had realised. Unwanted yet consensual sex is definitely a thing IMO.

Brock's grandparents believe him. Of course they do. They're his grandparents.

The thing to ask yourself, gonetoseeaman, is whether any of those men you 'went along' with ended up on a rape charge. Because if not, it's really, really not relevant.

Yes, It is a feminist principle that women should not be having sex unwillingly, ever, - yet I know women who do. They don't generally report it or call it rape, though, and they aren't rescued from behind dumpsters by Swedish cyclists and the police. Whilst unconscious.

So that is a somewhat separate issue from this case - the prosecution case, backed up very solidly by witnesses, was that she was unconscious. Was that she was likely targeted by Brock and dragged behind that dumpster. There is no consent when someone is unconscious. There was no tender talking about consent with the victim - she was unconscious. There can be no denying that Brock was aware that she unconscious - the jury believed it, the world believes it. It was obvious to 2 men from a distance that she was unconscious, and Brock the rapist was sufficiently compos mentis to then leg it when they shouted at him.

Brock's statement is completely discredited by 2 witnesses. He lied. He made up the tender 'consent' talk, whispered in her ear. He made it up to try to get off the rape charge.

Frankly, by talking the way you are, you are muddying the waters here. If you want to start a more general thread on consent, then you should. This victim could not consent - 2 independent witnesses saw that she was unconscious, out cold.

Hear hear, UTGT.

Gone, this isn't the first thread where you've stretched to find reasons to hold victims partly responsible.

I tried to get the word 'unconscious' in as many times as possible, Detestable....just to hammer it home, like.

The father's appeal to the judge had more content than first reported.

www.vox.com/2016/6/8/11876580/stanford-sexual-assault-father-letter (full text annotated by Alyssa Peterson, "a policy and advocacy coordinator for Know Your IX, a student survivor organization that empowers students to end sexual and dating violence in their schools".)

"he is gifted in his ability to understand very complicated subject matter. This natural ability along with an extremely strong work ethic lead to academic success at all levels"

American education must be pretty poor if he counts as academically gifted & successful

'I actually don't think it's too much to ask that men ensure 100% that they have consent every single time they have sex.

So you are saying that unless men verbally ask for consent every time they have sex, it's rape? Or how far are you taking that?'

If the only way a man is 100% sure that he has consent is by getting consent verbally, then yes, he should get consent verbally. I'd rather that 1 billion men were slightly inconvenienced by having to having to ask 'are you ok with this?' 'Are you sure you want to go ahead?' than 1 woman was raped. I don't think that's too high a standard to have.

If a man doesn't get verbal consent, and he goes ahead and has sex with a woman who doesn't want it, then yes, that is, by definition, rape. I don't see any grey area there.

'you say that NT adults don't get caught up in misunderstandings but for some people, especially when younger, romantic and sexual encounters can be prolonged exercises in confusion, failed attempts at mind-reading, saying what you don't mean, doing what you don't want, and trying to avoid rejection at all costs. Very sadly, I have known many girls who have seen sexual encounters as a necessary evil that I very much doubt they either encouraged or actually tried to stop. For many young women who think it's the only way to 'keep a man', sex is often not a happy, enthusiastic business at all but this doesn't mean it isn't consensual. I agree with you that women shouldn't have to feel this way and it's frustrated that they do.'

Then this is a situation that must change.

Stanford University reported a sexual assault every two weeks in the three years leading up to Brock Turner’s rape of an unconscious woman in 2015.

It was really important that the Stanford RAPIST Brock Turner was made an example of.

It's no wonder that there is a rape culture amongst the male elite college population when, even in the most open and shut case, as the Stanford RAPIST one was, the incredibly lenient and unjust punishment of a convicted RAPIST has absolutely no power to be a deterrent.

---- RAPIST is in capitals because bloody Maryjo15 and her pathetic comments are making me !