'It might not have been rape, she might have had sex and regretted it afterwards'

[BravoHopeful]

This statement makes no sense. If you had consensual sex and the next day regretted it, why on earth would you go through the whole horrible experience of reporting it to the police and everything that follows? You would just move on and put it behind you.

It's always trotted out as a likely explanation in 'date rape' type cases. But it makes no sense whatsoever. AIBU?

Oh come on, if a woman was lying there completely motionless, most men would at least ask 'is that ok, do you like that'. And she would then give some sort of signal that she was.

I would have thought that a woman who lied there not moving and then gave absolutely no signal that she was enjoying herself when asked is quite rare. As I said upthread, im relatively 'inhibited' but I am still perfectky capable of giving signals as to whtether I am having fun, and DH is capable of reading them.

In any case, 'some women are 'inhibited' is not an excuse for a man to just plough on regardless without checking if she is enjoying herself.

Venus Telling me to fuck off is the lowest form of debate. I disagree with what others are saying but I don't sling insults around.

I would have thought that a woman who lied there not moving and then gave absolutely no signal that she was enjoying herself when asked is quite rare.

I mean in a consensual context here of course.

I really understand why people here have continued to try to reason with certain posters.

But ime women with misogynist views on rape are often, although not universally, of lower intelligence or lower education levels than average, and/or have been thoroughly brainwashed by the male script - either by their upbringing in general or by their current partner.

You're very unlikely to make them understand or change their views, so this is all a bit of a waste of time.

You have been much more offensive than me, korma. It's funny that's all you can respond to, isn't it?

The way that feminists go about achieving their goals can alienate others, including women I believe. And the only people feminists are harder on than rapists are women who don't accept their help, protection and dogmatic definitions of life, the universe and everything. IF you were less militant and sure the world is against you, you might find that plenty of people share some of your views and would happily find common ground with you. That would be constructive. But you are so keen to write off anyone who doesn't toe your specific line that you have the rest of the world defined as woman-hating rapist-lovers before you really know what they stand for. I think far more people (including men) care about rape victims than you realise. They just don't necessarily agree with you on every point and your insistence on having the prerogative to define these matters and state categorically what women must think etc. is isolating. For feminists. And undermines your points, frankly

Agree with this - I think this is a great post and illustrated exactly how I'm feeling.

I'm late to the thread and have skimmed and nearly shut it down because so many of the posts were so offputting. The tone of a LOT of posters isn't doing anything to educate or encourage thought IMO, they're coming across as dictatorial and superior.

I know you're right Manon, but I think it's important that rape apologist views aren't left to stand.

Also yes of course if a woman was lying motionless and quiet any normal man would at least ask if she's enjoying it.

Mygiddyuncle how can you come into a thread with over 700 posts, says you've skim read it and decide that?

No one is coming across as superior imo and the message is simple.

Consent is essential and women are not responsible for being raped, ever.

Mygiddyuncle, Did you read the rest of that person's ridiculous posts? If you read their views and think they're reasonable I'm not sure it's worth moderating my tone for you to be honest. RTFT.

Light, Given that, just how can we stay safe?

I posted a link earlier to the Suzy Lamplugh Trust which has good advice for students, street safety etc.

Do you not have any suggestions?

Well that's exactly what I thought. As an outsider, very late to the party (and with no intention of reading 32 pages), I skim read the last 10 or so. And rolled my eyes and went to close it. It was all just a bit much, people screaming rape apologist at fairly sensible (although different viewpoints) posts IMO.

Then I read the post which I quoted and it illustrated exactly what I was feeling. There's an active group of posters who are posting frequently, but I think for many, the whole tone of so many posts IS incredibly offputting and does nothing to benefit the wider cause. Whilst you're (general) screaming rape apologist and posting that those of differing views must be less eductated/of lower intelligence , you're doing nothing but alienating people. It's counter productive.

Tut tut, how dare we women get het up about men raping us and people making excuses for them? The real issue here isn't the violence or the misogyny or the victim blaming, it's that we are too strident in saying that the above is wrong.

Well I guess you're going to have to get over yourself, because I'll post what I like, thanks. If you don't want to be called a rape apologist, why not go away and have a little think about why people might think that?

If someone is put off being against rape by the fact that it's an emotional topic that women get angry about, they weren't worth having onside in the first place. If someone is a decent human being, nothing will deter them from opposing rape.

You haven't read the thread, you have no idea of most of what's been said.

Giddy Welcome to the thread (your brave!)

YY Woman.

It's like saying, well I would agree with you that murder is wrong, but you were very hectoring and strident in your argument. And you implied that you are superior to people who commit murder or support murderers!

So I have no choice but to support murder, I'm afraid. You just didn't put your point across nicely enough.

We don't believe that should be the focus, korma. It's not working. Quite frankly you are just being a GF now, you have no intention of engaging with anyone in good faith.

Funny how it's only women's rights issues that people refuse to support unless they are put forward in a docile, pleasing (submissive?) way.

Don't you have anything else?

Korma showed what they were about when they said that a promiscuous woman's rape was less important because the victim could have prevented. They're not here to debate sensibly or make genuine points. Just don't engage.

Indeed, WWA.

So I have no choice but to support murder, I'm afraid. You just didn't put your point across nicely enough

Has anyone actually come out and said they support rape then? I definitely missed that.