"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

Kinddogstail:

in response to your question:

'Has anyone answered whether her (gone) male friend was raped or coerced?'

She just compared our posts to how a rapist works. As soon as she did that I think she lost the right to have any of questions answered.

Fuck that for a game of soldiers. My name's Billy, not Silly.

In the morass of articles in the US legal press which this case has spawned I have seen somewhere that in California the sentence cannot be increased on appeal. So this apology for a man and a human being is on a one-way bet in lodging an appeal.

The prosecuting authorities have concluded that there is no avenue of appeal open to them - as was the case in this country until sometime in the Eighties. (In 1977 a man convicted of rape got a non-custodial sentence and there was nothing that could be done about it).

The article cited upthread by SenecaFalls is fascinating. I had not realised that the judge had passed the sentence recommended by a probation officer; and that the probation officer was female. There you go, it's a funny old world.

Kinddogstail:
In my opinion, GTSAMAD has also not made light of the horrific rapes others here have experienced just because she has shown how a constellation of certain dynamics can be grouped around a certain poster on a thread in a way that shows similarities to a person being singled out, attacked and diminished.

There is a tactic called the edge effect. One person will post a series of 'points' gradually moving the focus of discussion to the place they want to be.

If other people disagree and refuse to move, that is not attacking. That is discussion.

That's interesting elsie. I've seen that a lot on mumsnet

Agree, really interesting.

The person initiating the sex needs to see that the person they want to have sex with is enthusiastically consenting, not wavering and being polite.

This is where I have the problem, and why the tea example works so well.

You can easily say no to a cup of tea, there is no harm in saying no and you don't feel obligated. The person offering doesn't usually feel offended and you carry on. This is how it should be for sex. It's easy to offer, easy to say no, and easy to carry on with no hard feelings.

The other problem, I'm not passing blame anywhere, is that people aren't mind readers. You can't expect them to be.

If you have sex even though you secretly didn't want to, you still consented, you just did something you didn't want to do. I don't like cleaning, I still do it, and I still consent to cleaning up after dinner.

If you feel you will be emotionally damaged by doing something intimate you don't like, don't do it. If you don't feel you can do that, then take the time to learn it before going into an intimate relationship. If you are with a partner that doesn't accept no, get out and find someone who respects you. The onus is on you to make your needs known, not on your partner to figure out a riddle every time you say something.

I know society has raised girls to be polite, but it's 2016 and we've all had time to figure out how to have enough self respect for our own body autonomy and to raise our daughters to do the same.

Here is what the Guardian wrote:
But Persky’s decision was predicated on the pre-sentence investigation report prepared and submitted by a nameless probation officer. That person is at the heart of this mess, because he or she recommended that Turner get less than a year’s sentence, and Persky followed their lead.

Not sure how we know the officer was a woman, or why that would be relevant, though this article seems to suggest that probation officers can be very untrustworthy.

I don't think we expect women to be automatically more horrified by sexual assault than men (witness this thread).

If you feel you will be emotionally damaged by doing something intimate you don't like, don't do it. If you don't feel you can do that, then take the time to learn it before going into an intimate relationship. If you are with a partner that doesn't accept no, get out and find someone who respects you.

This is so important. I agree totally with this message. It is tricky, though, as many victims feel blamed, and blame themselves, for not saying no in a clear way or not walking away from someone who wouldn't hear no. Some freeze, and say nothing. So they never said no.

Being emotionally strong and giving a clear message of yourself to the world is not always easy to achieve. I would say it's often a life-long struggle for many women, getting to a place where you learn to respect yourself and walk away from anyone who doesn't respect you, and learn to articulate clearly and unambiguously what you want.

Many women are in emotionally vulnerable positions. They will give unclear signals. Plus being physically vulnerable. Yet still, they do not deserve to be raped.

Was reading the other day that criminals are highly skilled at choosing their victims. They know how to spot the vulnerable person. It's easy to say, lock your door if you don't want to be burgled. But not easy to say to a human being - don't give off any signal of emotional or physical vulnerability.

fusionconfusion your post at Sun 12-Jun-16 08:12:28 is brilliant.

Senpai re "The onus is on you to make your needs known, not on your partner to figure out a riddle every time you say something."

The onus is on you when you are the agent of your own actions, of course. But if someone is trying to do something to you/with you then the onus is on the person initiating sex to make sure it is something the other person wants and continues to desire.

I really think this is being made too complicated. It is not. If your partner or someone you just meet is not keen on sex, if you need to get them drunk or talk them into it, then they are really not a willing partner.

'If you have sex even though you secretly didn't want to, you still consented, you just did something you didn't want to do. I don't like cleaning, I still do it, and I still consent to cleaning up after dinner.

If you feel you will be emotionally damaged by doing something intimate you don't like, don't do it. If you don't feel you can do that, then take the time to learn it before going into an intimate relationship. If you are with a partner that doesn't accept no, get out and find someone who respects you. The onus is on you to make your needs known, not on your partner to figure out a riddle every time you say something.

I know society has raised girls to be polite, but it's 2016 and we've all had time to figure out how to have enough self respect for our own body autonomy and to raise our daughters to do the same.'

Wow. This post lacks empathy on such an epic scale I find it quite scary.

When you clean up after dinner you are not having something done to you, nor are you doing something to do someone else. It is nowhere near similar to putting your body parts into someone else/having their body parts put into you. The comparison is beyond bizarre.

The 'advice' not to do things that are emotionally damaging is equally bizarre. Do you really think it's that straightforward? That if people do things that emotionally damage them, they did it purely out of choice? That all they have to do to counteract possibly decades of emotional difficulties is simply choose to change? Surely if that were the case there would be absolutely no need for counselling, mental health services, PTSD support, all everyone would have to do would be to choose not to react to abuse. Simple.

'The onus is on you to make your needs known, not on your partner to figure out a riddle every time you say something.' The onus is also on you to be very very sure that every time you stick your body parts into someone that they definitely want it.

"The onus is also on you to be very very sure that every time you stick your body parts into someone that they definitely want it."

Yes, sparrow hawk. I think the point Senpai was making was just that if you feel uncomfortable with something then, when your partner is seeking consent, you should let them know that rather than going along with something you regret later. Ie Don't give consent to something you don't like. (I could be wrong - that's just the way I read it)

Kawliga somewhere up thread there has been a citation to an article confirming that the Court or the probation office has confirmed that the probation officer was a woman. Not strictly relevant; just another extraordinary aspect to what I hope even by American standards is an extraordinary case. As is the fact that Leslie Rasmussen is also female in spite of the spelling which in Britain would suggest make. Being totally bloody stupid and celebrity-dazzled is equal opps.

As for consent: there is the consent when both parties are really, really up for it, and the consent when she is TTC and he is TTB and the calendar and the thermometer say Tonight's the Night and one or both of them would rather go to sleep, but the wish for a child leads them on; and that's still consent. The act is less satisfying but it is still consensual.

Obviously nothing like this swine's case. But if there is no avenue of appeal, there it is; the State of California cannot invent one retrospectively.

The main feeling I got from this case is that all rapists need to do in America is drug or knock their victims unconscious, then it can't be rape. Oh, and be white and middle class. Just horrendous...

The onus is also on you to be very very sure that every time you stick your body parts into someone that they definitely want it.

This is the nub of it in a nutshell.

Even in AndrewFogg's example of a couple TTC, that still stands. There is willing, active consent, or there is a rain check, no matter what the thermometer says.

There are no grey areas. There are no what ifs. If a person is unable to decipher the fairly basic body language that a no entails, they shouldn't be having sex. Or if they do have sex, they need to be extremely aware of their partner's feelings by asking them.

Why do so many people buy into the idea that men just can't stop themselves once they've started, so the onus is on women to make sure they aren't raped? Haven't we got past the idea that sex is something that men do to women?

If you feel you will be emotionally damaged by doing something intimate you don't like, don't do it. If you don't feel you can do that, then take the time to learn it before going into an intimate relationship. If you are with a partner that doesn't accept no, get out and find someone who respects you.

This is just victim blaming tosh. It also displays an almost breathtaking lack of understanding of the dynamics of abusive relationships. So, to correct it...

Sometimes the strongest people have relationships with abusive men. There are often red flags early on in the relationship that indicate that you are being groomed for abuse, if you don't see them for red flags, that doesn't mean you consent to any future abuse. Getting out of an abusive relationship isn't a prerequisite for help or sympathy or belief, getting out is hard, there are organisations who will help you get out when you're ready to take that step.

There's a huge difference in not being able to read body language and carrying on regardless and a woman not understanding red flags for abuse and staying in the relationship.

There's Asperger's in our family (both sides) and we genuinely do have trouble reading body language and facial expressions. It took a while for both of us to realise that despite what you see on the movies, in our case we needed to do some unromantic clear talking to know whether the other party was actually enjoying what was going on (in some cases you get the answer 'Yes! Of course I bloody am! Don't stop now to talk about it for god's sake...' but that's better than the alternative).

It probably doesn't help that I definitely have Resting Bitch Face and both of us are seriously shortsighted.

Somehow never accidentally shagged an unconscious partner, all the same.

I will be teaching my children especially my son that nothing short of active enthusiastic sober consent is to be acted on.....ever.

I will also be teaching my daughters to stay away from anyone who says that the consent issue is complicated or difficult.

Kitties, Yes, DS2 has ASD and so I have taught him that if he is unsure about body language when it comes to sexual activity, to ask. I fully expect his sexual partner at some point to basically yell the same as you posted, but as you said it's better than the alternative.

Here is a video of two men carrying an unconscious girl on the way to raping her.
This link is about a person in the UK. CTV produced the evidence that convicted the men here. They would have got away with it otherwise.

The video shows the men carrying the unconscious girl through the street.

www.itv.com/news/anglia/2016-03-24/teenager-hopes-speaking-about-rape-ordeal-will-empower-others-to-come-forward/

'Yes, sparrow hawk. I think the point Senpai was making was just that if you feel uncomfortable with something then, when your partner is seeking consent, you should let them know that rather than going along with something you regret later. Ie Don't give consent to something you don't like.'

Would you equally apply this advice in situations where the person's partner is likely to sulk/become nasty if consent isn't given?

Didn't read that quote Sparrow, the lack of insight is just fucking breathtaking.

??? Sparrowhawk.

I don't think they should consent to something they don't enjoy - regardless of the other person's opinion of it. I'm not sure how you're reading it.

So bumbley you can't ever envisage a situation where a person feels trapped into saying yes by the fact that their partner will become aggressive if they say no and they don't have the resources to leave?

The 'advice' not to do things that are emotionally damaging is equally bizarre. Do you really think it's that straightforward? That if people do things that emotionally damage them, they did it purely out of choice?

I agree with this, of course. People have sex for very complicated reasons. They sometimes give consent for very complicated reasons. There are times when they may give it but would rather not for reasons that may or may not be down to the person they are with. There are times when they are the only person who could possibly know that they don't want to go ahead with this. Which is really, really sad.

There's an understandable tendency to blame the man in the scenario for every cultural pressure/coercion that may be felt by a woman. But she has come to that scenario from a very unhealthy culture to begin with and may feel pressure to have sex that is unrelated to the way he is treating her. People at often at their least transparent and their most anxious to please when they are dating. That doesn't just stop when they get to the bedroom.

I'm not saying it's easy, but without diminishing the responsibility on men's shoulders to do all they can to ensure there is enthusiastic consent, they are not the only ones with a role to play in the consent process. It's not just about 'sticking a dick' in someone else's body - if it was, I wouldn't have male friends who regretted being pressurised into sex. Women are capable of a lot more than whispering 'yes' meekly when asked if they are willing to be penetrated. Rape is about someone forcing themselves on a person (of either gender) but many women (me included) don't see sex as something that a man 'does' to a woman and neither do men, which is possibly why it doesn't necessarily seem natural to some men to ask.

What point are you trying to make? That they should consent to something that they don't want in that situation? You said "The onus is also on you to be very very sure that every time you stick your body parts into someone that they definitely want it." I agreed with you on this. The second part is my interpretation of what Senpai said. I could be wrong on it. I don't think she was talking about abusive relationships - more situations where the woman decides not to speak up about something that she doesn't want/enjoy and regrets later but, as far as her partner was concerned, she was consenting and was happy about it at the time.

In any case, in the situation you are describing, the 'onus being on the man to ensure the woman definitely wants it' means nothing anyway. Do you actually think he cares? The woman is only consenting under duress but as far as the man is concerned, he is 'very sure that she wants it'. It doesn't solve anything in that situation.