16 year old stepson's reaction to the Russel Brand sentencing

[inthisdayandage27]

Name change as I'm absolutely shocked actually.

My 16 year old stepson's reaction to the Russel Brand sentencing over dinner tonight was "Well, most women lie about it, don't they?"

I said "You can't seriously think that can you?"

He replies "Well you think that about men" (Which made little sense, but..)

We sort of left it like that because I was dumbstruck that he could think that.

Now, I have a slightly younger son who I hope will have absorbed some respect of women from me (and I sure will be having a chat with him) but more worrying I have a 12 year old daughter too. The step kids (both boys) are here half the time.

I'm honestly not sure how to go about this as I am hands off parenting with step kids (thinking they had sensible parents although I do worry my partner isn't as liberal as I am with his thinking).

I think having a chat to his mum would be over stepping the mark but I feel I can't leave this.

His father needs to have a serious talk with him.

Yes.
I do think that a very small percentage of women lie, because they do.

Not a man.

Do you seriously believe no women has ever lied about being raped?

I mean really?

I'm not saying that you are stupid at all but I am saying that to put forward the idea that women never, ever lie about being raped is stupid because in a small amount of cases they do lie.

Why are you even arguing about this? Most people would agree my stance is reasonable.

What are you trying to do? Shame me into agreeing with you? Never going to happen.
So unless you want this pointless back and forth please don't bother to reply.

A powerful, historically untouchable man, has been thrown in jail, even with his ample resources for historical sexual offences.

Of course the swamp of online manosphere is going to go on overdrive trying to defend him, undermine his victims.

Parents nowadays are not just parenting against the general societal consensus, which let’s face it in the past, actually largely still, was heavily biased towards letting men have control over women, now it has shifted to online. And there are very effective communicators online who can talk the talk.

I think it’s good that SS has said what he said, his parents (and you @inthisdayandage27) need to know what he thinks. What is influencing him.

Expecting 16 year olds to be able to have the maturity to be immune to the poison they see and hear all the time from online, to peers, to other adults is naive.

Opening up a dialogue, building trust and talking through opinions is always a good thing even if there are bumps along the way.

My parents never had to talk to me about photographs of my vagina but we have had to talk about dic pics (and flap snaps) to our teens (that was fun!).

A lot of males are being convinced that women still “ask for it”, that they are owed extreme sex (even before they have had a relationship in some cases), that their failures are someone else’s fault.

Russel Brand isn’t the only rich and powerful predator who should be in jail. But he’s one of the only ones who they could actually get a case to court. And that’s part of the problem, many women are believed when they report rape, but getting a conviction “beyond reasonable doubt” is a different level. It’s hard.

Yes some women lie, but no where near the number who walk around daily knowing their rape will never get a conviction and have to live with that trauma for the rest of their lives.

When you have husbands drugging their wives and inviting other numerous men to use them sexually whilst unconscious and no one in this sphere of fucking evil says a word about it to anyone - and the social defence boils down to “yeah but but but some women lie” - come on guys is that all you can manage?

So you can’t have an open conversation with his father, your husband, about being what (you’ve skirted around but sounds like) misogynistic views? Your first port of call is to contact his mum? Mate, you’ve married the problem! You’ve got a 12 year old daughter in a house with a misogynistic 16 year old boy. Is your husband her biological father? Fucking hell, I’d be hugely worried.

A lot of teenagers speak in extremes, especially if they are unsure of the ground they are on.
My own interpretation is that their brains are still developing particularly reasoning and they are unconsciously employing a negotiating position fallacy, sort of the inverse of the middle ground fallacy, whereby the more extreme the starting claim the less likely they will have to concede all the way to a complete withdrawal.
So a small minority becomes most.

Unless there is a pattern of contempt for women I would not consider this problematic.

One thing I discussed with my son and his friend who is staying with us about this is their confusion on how to navigate respecting someone's autonomy, particularly them as young men respecting that women can make competent choices versus understanding when someone (sober) may not have all the power they need to make a truly informed choice.

This sprung from the RB sentencing, but sort of evolved to situations where someone might appear consenting, even enthusiastically so, but the chances of them feeling negatively about it later on (even years later) is high.

We discussed the fact that saying no, even though someone has said yes, or even initiated the interaction, is still respecting their autonomy. You're just realising your own autonomy, too.

Nobody has said that no woman has NEVER lied.
OPs stepson suggested that ‘MOST’ women lie. Clear and utter bollocks.
These women did NOT lie and Russel Brand has been found guilty.
I’m not certain which micro hill you’re trying to die on here, or for what purpose, but you are making a div of yourself.

Maybe. And definitely a good teaching moment.

But my first step would be to speak to my dh about what on-line material his son had been absorbing.

The establishment are clearly out to get Robinson, Fox and Farage, that isn’t in dispute.

People like Brand had immense social media followings way in excess of any individual or organisation liked to government. He was the darling of the left for quite some time because of this but eventually fell out of favour from Covid onwards when his views because misaligned with theirs.

As for the comments about Glitter, Harris etc I’m at a loss to understand your point. Surely you aren’t dense enough to be suggesting the point being made is sex offenders are only ever pursued if they are public figures who oppose government?

I'd also add that a talk about how changing your mind can be really hard might be in order. Especially when you liked a person. It can feel like their behaviour reflects on you or that you were stupid to like them. I think the latter particularly where you have all these people coming out saying, 'Well, I knew he was a wrongun.' It can make it easier to believe he's been stitched up, so that you don't have to change your mind. But it's actually a sign of strength and judgement to change your mind when the evidence is added to.

You can tell him that statistically as a man he is 230 times more likely to raped himself than to be falsely accused. Others have raised good points to tell him tok about how hard it is to actually even get to court let alone get a conviction.

I would be bringing this up with the dad, sternly. He needs to talk to his son. If he is also of the same thinking then you really need to question the type of people you are around and are raising your daughter around. It really is that serious.

I would be bringing this up with the dad, sternly.

I wouldn't. I'd be going in with the assumption that he's decent. That way he's much more likely to be on board. People don't like to be lectured. If that fails then, yeah, things get more difficult.

There is a glaring issue with these stats and if you want to have a conversation about the issue with someone who is wholly doubtful like the SS, it's better to acknowledge it.

These stats come from cases where they have proven that the claim was false.

We know that most allegations of rape or SA do not make it to court because there is insufficient evidence and/or poor investigation.

What we do not know for pretty much the same reasons is how many of these allegations that do not make it to court were false. We can assume most of them are true for a variety of reasons. But we don't know how many are false.

That leads us to discuss with young men that indeed, the risk for some men in some situations to have false allegations against them is heightened. That is why we have to think about our choices and even if all boxes are ticked on paper in terms of the legality of consent, it's sometimes best to still say no.

It’s tricky with Brand because there’s two elements of denial if you like. One is the track your stepson has gone down of assuming the women were lying which is easily done given how many women did consensually have sex with him at the time… He literally had women queuing up to shag him at the height of his fame. Brand’s dad has also adopted this position.

Then there’s the people who believe it’s all a wider conspiracy because Brand has flipped from being borderline communist maybe a decade ago to being far right. He’s always been fairly anti establishment either way and always called out the wealthy and powerful among us. Why they’d be suddenly quite so concerned about him spouting off on TikTok is beyond me but there you go.

Eh? I'm only responding to another poster who seemed to want involve herself in a bun fight with me.
You're the 'div' if you can't see that.
Try using the quote history function.

If you did you'd see that I utterly refute the suggestion that most women lie.

My advice to young men would be to be sure that consent is given. Do not have sex with women unless she is enthusiastic about it. That's absolutely fundamental.
Do not have sex with intoxicated women. Ever. Not even one drink.
If she has taken any alcohol at all, politely excuse yourself from the date.

As an extra layer of protection., I would suggest that a 'had a great time last night' text is sent after doing the above if sexually activity has taken place and hopefully she'll send a text saying 'and me.'

This text should be saved. Never deleted.

I advise this not because most women lie, not at all, but as protection on the, admittedly slim, chance she changes her mind later.

That just opens up more dialogue dosent it. He can find a way to keep the conversation going.
If you say how you feel if you were raped shuts it down more.

"Do not have sex with women unless she is enthusiastic about it."

Vulnerable people can both be sober and enthusiastic. Still wise to say no.

"Do not have sex with intoxicated women. Ever. Not even one drink."

That's unrealistic. Both for casual encounters and ongoing relationships.

"I would suggest that a 'had a great time last night' text is sent after doing the above if sexually activity has taken place and hopefully she'll send a text saying 'and me.'"

This could be a fawning response by a victim and in no way proves consent where there is evidence and allegations that say otherwise.

Oh well then if that's the case it's best not for any young man to have casual sex again. Or indeed any man.

I'm sure that you will agree.

My 15 year old tried to come out with the 'lots of women lie' shit last night, both me and my husband slapped that right down.

I actually can't tell if you're being sarcastic. Obviously the advice never to have casual sex in case you are accused of rape is unrealistic but not more offensive than the advice to women not to wear certain things, not to go places alone, or be out at particular times in case they get raped, is it?

I think casual sex carries the highest risk for a false allegation. There are ways to minimise that risk.

Exactly.

This. He's the one that should be the role model for his son.

Not according to you there aren't.

Casual sex means, by definition, there is no real way of knowing the history of the person you are having sex with.

Right? Obviously right!

Thus all you can do - IF you are having casual sex with somebody-is ensure the consent is given and enthusiastically and that the person is not intoxicated. I suggested these things and you refuted them.

That is all you can reasonably do. What the feck else is there?
Signing of contracts? Cameras in the room?
Witnesses?