For what its worth and I know I will get flamed I thought Flic229 raised some pretty fair points in a well balanced way.
No, and no again.
One of my concerns is that somehow the process of investigation and prosecution now goes on autopilot using these 'guidelines'. Its one of this enudge issues. Changing the process without having a change of law to get a articular outcome. Its being done for a very good reason and I agree with that reason, I just worry about the ramifications. I have two mid teenage sons and I think that the definition of what constitutes rape might have accidentally changed.
The definition of what constitutes rape hasn't changed, hope that sets your mind at ease reference your sons, who, incidentally are more likely to be raped themselves than falsely accused. The process hasn't changed, the guidelines have, because on the whole, the police are still utterly shite when it comes to dealing with rape allegations. And, anyone who says that the police are rushing to charge men with rape really knows nothing about the subject.
A man has sex with a drunk woman and he didn't get a 'verbalised yes affirmation'. Police go on autopilot and the case gets sent to CPS. The man and women cat really remember every detail of the night and she isn't sure but under the guidelines the police must press charges.
a) why does this old chestnut keep being brought up?
b) why, if the woman is unsure, and nothing else has happened to make her believe that a crime has been committed, would she even go to the police. CE's victim went to the police because she thought her bag had been stolen and, because she couldn't remember anything from the night before, thought her drink might have been spiked. And we'll never know if it was or not.
The two facts we know are the woman had some alcohol and the man didn't get a positive yes. Did he rape her?
Has been picked apart by others.
Problem is that exact scenario happens thousands of times on a Saturday night all over the country.
However, this isn't th scenario Flic was referring to, is it? What he was referring to was the CE case, and if he thinks that situation is happening every Saturday night, then he maybe needs to be educating men about why it's rape.
I read a post a while ago on MN where a woman had gone back to a man's house taken her clothes off and got into bed with him. With the best will in the world when I was a young man I am pretty sure I would have not questioned whether the woman wanted sex and would not have been seeking a positive 'yes'.
You do realise that you have made yourself sound like a rapist there, don't you?
The thing is that she decided she didn't want sex in the end and by her own admission on the thread wasn't very clear about it but he was very decent and didn't have sex with her.
Yes, decent men don't rape women....
I am pretty sure a jury would not convict if he had because all her actions pointed to a yes even though she did decide no in the end and not in a very clear way and she did stay in the bed and she did stay until the morning.
Um, they shouldn't, but they will, because far too many people believe that a woman acting in a certain way in the hours before she's raped means she was asking for it.
People do al sorts of silly things and change their minds and get drunk. I am not sure I want police officers going on autopilot deciding to press rape charges based on 'guidelines' - even if the woman isn't really sure herself.
Raping someone isn't a "silly thing"
Why do we have to keep going over and over this? Unless you're 100% sure the woman/man is into what you're doing, don't stick your cock into them. Really, how hard is that?