The Myths About Women Who "Cry Rape"

[DontCallMePeanut]

From The Telegraph

Sorry, my head's not in the right place to provide any critique of this at the moment, but thought this would interest the members of the feminist section. Will attempt to comment when I have a clearer head.

It's views from people like MarySue which made me drop the charges when I was assaulted.

I didn't want to be torn apart in court, I was already torn enough in my head.

LOL at that site with its strapline:

"curing feminist indoctrination"

Bullet, so sorry.

Thanks HerBeX

I had to see them every weekday for 2 years, my school wouldn't exclude them because I didn't press charges. That was the kick in the teeth.

Sorry to hear that Bullet sneaks in another hug

Bullet, I'm so sorry

Yes, I know I said I was leaving. BUT I reserve the right to change my mind, and as the damage was already done, I'm staying. We;ve already lost a couple of people through various counts of misogyny and what not this past week. I'm not going to join that list because some little twerp keeps spouting rape apologetics. That counts as keeping quiet, which is misogyny wants from us. Not happening... Sorry, you'll have a hard time getting me to shut up and accept some crappy excuses for rape.

Thank you guys!

Glad to hear your staying Peanut, we need people like you (and so many others on the feminist board) on here! You give the silent people a voice.

Hear hear Peanut

Bullet, so sorry

Peanut, glad you feel strong enough to stay. When I first came on here (mostly lurking, rarely posting) I always wished I could be one of the angry feminists rather just wanting to cry every time I thought about this stuff. It's hard to stay unemotional when it's so close to you. It's only now I'm starting to get angry but I still feel the tears coming every now and then.

Karma, I need to stay, in a way. For me. I'm not one to give up on something I believe. And this has become something I'm passionate about. Like you, I lurked when I first came here, and I've only been here a few months. But now, I have the confidence to say what I think most of the time. And yup, I get angry doesn't mean I don't find myself shedding a few tears over some posts.

And thanks, everyone :)

holyShmoley - bit of background here - the person getting it in the neck for being a rape apologist is not a normal poster who might actually be persuaded, but someone who shares a number of characteristics with an MRA troll.

we have learnt from experience on here that there is a big difference between the people who come on with genuine questions and misconceptions and people who come on to cause trouble, and there is a lot of point in being gentle and tactful with the former but with the latter it is better to say it how it is.

holy, I think you have to call a spade a spade. If people don't like being called rape apologists they should think what it is about their views that leads people to that conclusion. To do anything else would be like trying to launch an anti drink driving campaign but trying not to upset people who are only a little bit over the limit and pretend it doesn't apply to them.

Sybil beat me to it.

A bit of background. Going back, not too long, I felt women should be responsible for minimising the risk they were in. Was adamant that they should follow those safety tips. It was only after dittany called me a rape apologist that I realised I needed to re educate myself. I hadn't heard the term before, so looked it up, and came across a blog post that put it so succintly that suddenly, everything made sense. I don't think I've used any rape apologetics since, and I'd hope to high heaven that someone would pull me up about it if I was.

good analogy Karma

holyshmoley, there's no point arguing politely with someone who has a different agenda to what most people of goodwill have - thrashing out the arguments, learning, tightening up their views and arguments. It is very clear that that's not what Mary has been doing, if you look at his/ her posts carefully, you'll notice that s/he is very careful to try and promote the idea that women are responsible for stopping rape while trying to pretend that s/he doesn't believe that by acknowledging that men shouldn't rape unconscious, drunk or in some other way incapacitated woman.

But s/he steadfastly refuses to address the argument about the majority of rapes (where women aren't unconscious etc.) and the social context in which they happen. S/he even denied that women who assert their wants and needs, are seen as aggressive, something even most non-feminists acknowledge. That is not someone who is interested in being educated, that's someone who has a rape apologist agenda and we are under no obligation not to call that out.

"MarySue, I'm really sorry if we are all misinterpreting what you are saying, but to be fair, we are all reading the same things and coming to the same conclusions about what you are saying.

For me, the reason why you are a rape apologist is because when unclefest described a scenario where she gave non-verbal signals that she wasn't consenting, your answer was that she should have said "no". Responsibility should be on the man to establish consent (and in law it is), not the woman to deny it. To put it down to women makes women's bodies a free for all."

Exactly.

Now bearing in mind I was on that thread, I think you can safely say I'm not some nutter with extreme views (not that I think anyone has come across that way on here), I am genuinely confused at the mixed messages you are putting across.

One minute you are saying basically the same as everyone else, the next you are saying something as ridiculous as what karma mentioned above.

The technique is pretending to agree with the basic premise (rape is wrong, men shouldn't do it, women are not responsible for it), while saying things which actually oppose that basic premise (women should just say no, refusal to answer direct questions about whether a woman who hasn't said no can ever be raped with the obvious get outs like unconsciousness, drunkenness etc., left aside).

It's very clever. For the unattentive, it looks as though the poster is agreeing with the basic premise, because they don't notice that the actual sentiments they are expressing, are the opposite of what they are at pains to say they believe.

And that's why posters like that can be so puzzling. Becuse they say they are saying one thing, while saying the opposite and so it does every fucker's head in.

Agreed, HerBeX

That's for certain HerBeX

I even went off to yell at learn some coding to clear my head

I remember reading an article a couple of years ago that said that women often didn't 'just say no' for a reason, and that was to avoid confrontation and antagonising an aggressor in situations when they were afraid for their safety. It was pointed out that in everyday life people rarely say 'No I don't want to', they say 'I'm sorry, I think I'm away that weekend...' or something similar. The original article put it much more clearly!

Yes there was also some research done on young men who were asked how they turned down sex if they didn't want it. Many of htem were horrified when asked if they just said a straight out bald "no". "Of course not - I'd say "I've got an important presentation tomorrow/ early start/ not feeling too well -would always let someone down gently, I woudln't want to embarrass her" was the gist of their responses.

This from the sex who haven't been conditioned from birth to consider other people's needs more important than their own. Yet even they find it excruciatingly embarrassing to just say no, they make polite, socially acceptable excuses to save everyone's face, because that's what we all do if we're nice, considerate, normal-ish people.

And yet women are supposed to be more assertive and clear than these young men, who are not actually in any danger or fear, even though they have been specifically given the message from birth, that assertiveness = nasty person. When they're scared and feeling trapped. They are supposed to make themselves clearer than young men who are in no danger of being raped.

Those same men, when watching a video of a rape scene, all said that it wasn't rape, because she hadn't straight out said a clear, unequivocal no. She'd hedged a bit, been polite, made excuses, was ambiguous - just like they all said they did when they didn't want sex. But the consequence for them, wasn't rape.