Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

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

649 replies

Unacceptable · 08/06/2016 10:50

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
TheSparrowhawk · 10/06/2016 09:17

Your argument about whether something was rape or not seems to centre around whether a jury would consider it to be rape or not. But surely what matters is whether the person themselves considers it rape or not? Whether they get a conviction after that is entirely secondary. Of course a conviction is what is wanted, but if it's the case that a jury wouldn't convict, due to lack of evidence, then that doesn't mean that person wasn't raped and it certainly doesn't change their feelings about what happened.

TheSparrowhawk · 10/06/2016 09:20

That's what bothers me about all this 'grey area' bullshit. It tells women that they might feel manipulated, violated, raped, but actually a bunch of people in a courtroom wouldn't agree and so therefore nothing really happened and they can't really complain.

There is no 'grey area,' except for people who for whatever reason have a vested interest in tacitly supporting rapists.

paddypants13 · 10/06/2016 09:24

I had a strange conversation with DH about rape last night. We were watching Braveheart of all things. It was the scene at the wedding where the lord comes and kidnaps the bride from her wedding to exercise his right to prima nochte (sp?).

He said "That would be a fun right to have."

Me "What the right to rape women?"

Him "It's not rape though, it's allowed."

Me "But the woman doesn't consent, so it's rape."

Him "Oh, of course. I never thought of that."

Me Confused

I should stress DH has never been aggressive to me in any way and is not at all sexist. It just didn't occur to him that it was rape because the woman didn't consent regardless of whether it was legal or not.

I haven't rtft so apologies if this is totally off topic.

As for Brock, he is a rapist, he ruined his own life. He chose to drink and put himself in a situation where he could loose control of himself.

The feminist board has been a revelation to me. Thank you for all the insights.

TheSparrowhawk · 10/06/2016 09:43

It's worth remembering that the judicial system of pretty much every country in the world was set up by men, for men. In the UK up until 1991 it was entirely legal to rape a woman as long as the woman was your wife. That is the sort of society we are slowly, slowly, slowly trying to change, a society that was entirely happen with the concept that when a woman signed a marriage register she no longer had any legal rights over her own body, her husband could now do whatever he liked with it, with impunity. It's a legal system that puts a man's desire to have sex over and above a woman's right not be assaulted.

TheSparrowhawk · 10/06/2016 09:43

That should say 'entirely happy'

KindDogsTail · 10/06/2016 09:54

In connection with what Well said and Gonetoseeamanaboutadog answered:
Well
Fourteen no's and then a grudging yes? - coercion. Rape.
There is no grey area. None
Gonetoseeamanaboutadog
So it would be helpful to know what constitutes coercion in the 'fourteen nos' scenario and what is 'fine and consensual

I was always impressed by what Helen Mirren said below. It is just so true. I remember in the original interview she said she had slept with men she didn't want to just because they would not leave her alone.
Helen Mirren (real one not mnet name)
If I’d had children and had a girl, the first words I would have taught her would have been ‘fuck off’ because we weren’t brought up ever to say that to anyone, were we? And it’s quite valuable to have the courage and the confidence to say, ‘No, fuck off, leave me alone, thank you very much. You see, I couldn’t help saying ‘Thank you very much’, I just couldn’t help myself

TinklyLittleLaugh · 10/06/2016 10:08

Some of those support letters that Valerie linked to could actually be construed as quite damning: the doctor who says that, in his experience, alcohol doesn't change your personality into a criminal one, it just amplifies what's already there: the friend saying she's seen him drinking lots of times and he's never not been in control of himself.

Simmi1 · 10/06/2016 10:28

I couldn't believe that he wrote that he wishes he'd never been a good swimmer so that the papers wouldn't want to write stories about him. They're writing stories as you carried out an appalling act on a defenseless woman - not because you swim fast! The sad fact is he will continue to live comfortably in his bubble surrounded by family and friends in complete denial about what he did. 3 months is an absolute joke. Even 3 years would be too short.

mimishimmi · 10/06/2016 10:46

Tinkly, that's what I thought earlier. Some of those support letters sounded a bit coreced so they were basically trying to say he did have it in him...

ValerieSweet · 10/06/2016 11:13

Yes, Tinky, it's interesting the way they've been included in the dossier of support. They do contradict each other, and aspects of his defence.

I think this one was written by someone who believes Brock is 100% innocent:

While consuming alcohol in my presence, Brock was the same great guy he was while sober. He was always in control and continued to act rationally and be himself all night.

I assume the reasoning behind this one is I have seen Brock drunk he didn't do anything wrong, then therefore he can't have done what he's accused of here.

Whereas this one is more ambiguous, first suggesting that alcohol diminished his responsibility ('released inhibitions') and magnified certain unstated personality traits (perhaps desire, sexual competetiveness, aggressiveness?), playing up the 'they were BOTH drunk; he had no idea what he was really doing; this is all a terrible misunderstanding' aspect:

...alcohol is a depressant and a chemical that can release inhibition and magnify both positive and negative personality traits, something I saw too often and too negatively in the Emergency Department.

But it then turns around and says:

It [alcohol] is not however a substance that dramatically changes someone’s intrinsic personality traits, suddenly altering someone from being mild mannered to criminalistics. I am afraid this is how it is sometimes portrayed and that Brock may have been depicted in a similar fashion.

I'm not sure who 'depicted' refers to. It's damning if he means Brock's own defense playing the he was NOT himself, the alcohol and environment entirely changed his personalilty angle. But, read as purely supportive, it might just mean that the prosecution have tried to portay his actions as brutal, uncontrolled, animalistic, and that this is a huge exaggeration, because it was just a mutually-drunken hook-up that went wrong.

The whole dossier is a confused mess of victim-blaming, minimizing, contradictory claims and a fair few people who don't seem to believe he's done anything. It's a fucking disgrace that these were provided post-trial and had a direct, acknowledged effect on sentencing.

ZippyNeedsFeeding · 10/06/2016 11:17

It probably wouldn't comfort his victim much, but this case has at least helped me (and probably others) to discuss issues relating to consent with their children. I only have sons, and I am aware of how much of what they know/think they know about women comes from me.

I showed them the tea and consent video and we talked about how to tell if someone is consenting or not. then we talked about how consent isn't really the issue. Anything less than enthusiasm should be interpreted as "No".

KindDogsTail · 10/06/2016 12:40

Zippy That is what will make the difference - people talking and talking to their children about enthusiastic consent.

I also think we should actively teach children that it is morally wrong under all circumstances to take advantage of a drunk person or to encourage them to drink or have drugs; that you need to always look out for your friends when you go out; that even in a group of friends, you can try to be unbelievably brave and say no to rape jokes and rape talk and boasting.

Teach them that they might see rape like things on Porn but that it is not right and they should not think girls/boys mean yes when they say no and that is part of the sex ritual.

Also, that it is deeply repulsive and morally wrong to take a picture of someone who had sex with you and show it around. A real person/their photograph is not your personal porn possession.

And helping girls/boys to be vehemently and viciously "rude' if need be to make their feelings known. Like Helen Mirren said, teach them to say FO to the circling wolf 'friends'.

Girls and children are taught to always be polite.
It is almost impossible for them to say 'No" and not back down in social situations.

Even that phrase a boy might say to a young girlfriend: "I'll wait till your ready [for sex]" never does really mean waiting. It never means, 'Maybe you will never want sex with me, I accept that". It always means by sub-text, 'Sooner or later I will have to have sex with you and that is my right".

ThumbWitchesAbroad · 10/06/2016 13:07

In terms of alcohol-induced behaviour change, I had a friend when I was much younger who was a lovely bloke in general, but when he had alcohol, he became very aggressive and not nice at all (never sexually assaulted anyone though). ANYWAY - he realised very quickly that alcohol did not agree with him, so guess what - he stopped drinking. Would have half a pint AT MOST because he didn't like who he became under the influence of alcohol.
Decent response to a problem, in a decent bloke.

DetestableHerytike · 10/06/2016 14:08

I remain in awe of his victim. The majority of focus on this case is, I believe, a result of her articulateness.

Let us not forget that other rapists have received derisory sentences and their victims less able/willing to put pen to paper, so the outrage on this case should be multiplied over and over.

KindDogsTail · 10/06/2016 14:09

Yes, that is true Thumb.

gonetoseeamanaboutadog · 10/06/2016 14:45

In response to nooka, I am not a rape apologist and have no interest in exonerating rapists.

People choose to have sex for all sorts of reasons, often, sadly when they'd rather not. I have no doubt that most of the time that choice is clear and the majority of the time it is easy for everyone to distinguish consensual but unwanted sex from rape.

Having said that, I'm not at all convinced that there aren't times when women allow sex to happen without giving verbal consent to it or participating much, but without signalling that they want it to stop, either. Far from exonerating men, defining sex as rape in those circumstances would be raising the bar.

IMO it simply doesn't go far enough to say that men should check verbally if there's any reason to doubt. Although I do think there's a responsibility on their shoulders to pick up on a lack of enthusiasm/participation where it can reasonably be expected of them, the reality is that some men may not realise there was any reason for doubt and may be working with a completely different set of cultural expectations. Such as, for example, assuming that the woman has an expectation that events unfold towards the sex act unless she says she doesn't want to carry on.

Men may also believe they are expected to act in a way that they have been told that women will find attractive and the messages about what women want are very, very misleading; our culture has very loudly and unhelpfully informed a generation of men that woman want to be dominated and mastered. I agree that most of the time this won't create a problem because most of us understand the concept of role playing but there are times, especially when the woman is not practiced at unequivocally stating her wishes, when both people have had a drink and they're not well known to each other, when perhaps it could.

I think it may, in some circumstances (perhaps rarely) be considerably more complex than 'would you like a cup of tea' - because there is only one way to work out if someone else would like tea and women don't tend to feel under complex cultural pressure to try to like tea, even if they don't want any. In thinking this through, I have no desire to remove the label from a rapist or trivialise the offence.

Brock's offence was heinous and it underlines, to me, the importance of understanding, without being afraid of where it will take us, all there is to understand about the cultural setting that gives rise to rape and exactly what is happening when women feel pressured to tolerate or participate in any kind of sexual coercion in our society. That does not need to be at odds with empowering women in sexual encounters, empowering victims or teaching men to seek nothing less than enthusiastic consent.

Women aren't blameless in adding to the confusion - magazines often have articles on sex that encourage women to go along with it if their partners are in the mood for sex, even if they don't want it, on the principle that if you weren't in the mood to begin with, you likely will be later. So the message that you ought to have unwanted sex is encouraged. In such circumstances, is there always a clear dividing line between 'I agreed to go along with this; it was consensual' and 'I let it happen but it happened to me - therefore I was raped'. Genuine question.

SenecaFalls · 10/06/2016 14:56

It probably wouldn't comfort his victim much, but this case has at least helped me (and probably others) to discuss issues relating to consent with their children.
I am pretty sure that it has comforted her that to know that her letter has prompted conversations like the one you had with your children and others all over the world. Last night one of the women who was instrumental is getting her letter released (and who in fact obtained permission from her to release it) made statements to that effect.

TheSparrowhawk · 10/06/2016 14:58

'In such circumstances, is there always a clear dividing line between 'I agreed to go along with this; it was consensual' and 'I let it happen but it happened to me - therefore I was raped'. Genuine question.'

What you're getting at here gone is the heart of a radical feminist analysis of why women's live are the way they are.

You say: 'Women aren't blameless in adding to the confusion - magazines often have articles on sex that encourage women to go along with it if their partners are in the mood for sex, even if they don't want it, on the principle that if you weren't in the mood to begin with, you likely will be later.'
While I agree that such advice exists, it's worth asking why women give this advice. What is it about how women are socialised in our society that causes them to advise other women to 'give in' to sex - to send the signal that sex is a duty rather than a pleasure.

Going back to your original question above, the answer is - there isn't a clear dividing line because women's own sexuality - their control over their bodies, their own feelings about sex and how and when they want it - have been controlled and muddied for so long by patriarchy that it's hard for women to even name what's going on in a coercive situation, never mind understand at what point a line has been crossed.

The ideal situation is one where everybody makes entirely free sexual choices and at no point engages in sex they don't want. But it is a fact that in our society, where women have been trained for so long to see sex as something men need, deserve and bargain for, women's feelings around sex are extremely complicated. They have been very well socialised to believe that they should 'give in' to sex because otherwise their man will leave and being single is worse than being alone for a woman.

As you can see it's a big tangled mess of expectations, conditions and control. But as a feminist my viewpoint is that regardless of what the law says, if a woman ever, in her life, ever has unwanted sex that is entirely wrong and she does not ever have to tolerate it for any reason. She may feel that she has to, but I don't want that for her and I wish she didn't feel that way.

ValerieSweet · 10/06/2016 15:02

I remain in awe of his victim. The majority of focus on this case is, I believe, a result of her articulateness.

The chilling thing is, if she wasn't an articulate woman, we probably wouldn't even have heard about the case. He might not even have been convicted.

The fact that she was able to respond clearly and consistently to extensive, aggressive and invasive questioning in court meant a lot. A woman lacking in confidence; inarticulate; intimidated by relentless interrogation and attempts at character assassination; too traumatised by the events to revisit them in any detail -- she would've been ignored.

Similarly, a woman who was uneducated, who had anything in her past that might be used against her including a 'reputation' for promiscuity, one-night-stands, outdoor sex, whatever details the legal team and private investigator could dredge up or who for some reason could be painted as unsympathetic, suspect, not credible (she's too upset = she's faking it; she's too calm = it never happened; she's poorer than him = she's after compensation; they once dated = she's out for revenge) -- again, she would've been ignored.

I understand that anyone accused of rape is entitled to a vigorous defense, but throwing so much time and money at professionals whose main tactic is to rip the defendent to shreds is disgusting. (And yet another thing that Brock has refused to take responsibility for, saying 'that was just my attorney and his way of approaching the case'.)

So another thing I hope people will talk about more, after this, is how much a witness is supposed to endure in court the victim here has described the court questioning as a second assault, causing irreparable trauma to herself and her family and what the hell happens to women who can't speak so eloquently about their experience.

RebelRogue · 10/06/2016 15:05

I just read that he's only going to serve 3 months.so even the disgusting and totally unfair sentence of 6 months got shortened!! And ofc he won't be in with the general population,and have an escort. We wouldn't want the poor boy to be abused now,would we?

DetestableHerytike · 10/06/2016 15:05

Well said Valerie

KindDogsTail · 10/06/2016 16:20

I agree with what you said Valerie
I also think that If the two swedish men had not been witnesses, but she had tried to press charges, say if she had woken up while Bork was attacking her - she would not have stood a chance at court.

Also, thank you to Gonetoseeamanaboutadog and Sparrowhawk for writing
about complicated aspects of womens' and girls' consent. You put half felt, usually unspoken pressures constantly faced by them (in my opinion) very eloquently.

TheSparrowhawk · 10/06/2016 16:23

Sorry I see one of the lines in my last post makes no sense. It should say 'being single is worse than being in a sexually abusive relationship for a woman'

I'm glad my posts have clarified things Kind. If there are issues you'd like to discuss a thread in the feminist section will always get informed, considered responses (as well as the odd goady response that can be ignored.)

MrsHathaway · 10/06/2016 16:25

Great point, Valerie, and no doubt critical to why women don't report assaults and rapes.

AugustaFinkNottle · 10/06/2016 16:38

I'm astonished that Persky regarded Rasmussen's letter as a "strong character reference" given that she wasn't even prepared to acknowledge that what he did was wrong. However, she has now publicly withdrawn it - though that may have quite a lot to do with the public reaction and the fact that her band has had a number of gigs cancelled directly as a result.