Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

OP posts:
LonginesPrime · 07/11/2018 21:06

WTF?

He stated 'we just had sex' and later said he wasn't sure whether they had sex, and then that they were going to have sex but he stopped?

It's scary how blinded by misogyny people still are.

Vvmevvme · 07/11/2018 21:09

I was wearing massive granny pants the night I got raped, does that mean I’ll get a conviction?

I have to tell myself there is more to this case than what is written there otherwise there is absolutely no point going their with it.

As it is the police ask questions like “you had your phone why did you not lock yourself away and call us?”

Erm well when you are terrified it’s the last thing on your bloody mind!

stillathing · 07/11/2018 21:11

And yet so many people cannot see the structural misogyny of our society.

Heartbreaking.

Gileswithachainsaw · 07/11/2018 21:12

He wouldn't have even seen her pants if he hadn't raped her .

How many men have the fact they had a condom in their pocket held against themHmm

Absolutely disgusting Angry

ALittleBitofVitriol · 07/11/2018 21:13

Yeah, but we're told to 'just report it' by certain folx and papa patriarchal justice will sort it.

I would never advise reporting a rape.

Poor girl. You are so brave.

Annandale · 07/11/2018 21:15

Jesus.

Do my knickers consent for me now? Is it the lace or the thong bit that says 'yes' when i don't say anything?

Gileswithachainsaw · 07/11/2018 21:19

Do my knickers consent for me now? Is it the lace or the thong bit that says 'yes' when i don't say anything?

Who do we ask so we can compile a list of acceptable clothing . A "not asking for it" range . Covering everything from socks, to outerwear.

trytrytrytry · 07/11/2018 21:20

What’s even more sickening is that the person that made the comment is a woman

In her closing address to the jury, Ms Elizabeth O’Connell SC told jurors they should have regard for the underwear the complainant wore on the night

IStandWithPosie · 07/11/2018 21:27

So if our knickers are consenting for us does that mean “no knickers =no consent”? I somehow very much doubt that. I can just imagine how “no knickers” would be perceived. Angry

Knickers need to be printed with “I do not consent to sex” on them now do they?

Gileswithachainsaw · 07/11/2018 21:29

But then how do you explain them seeing your knickers to be able to read that you don't consent.

Quite the conundrum...

IStandWithPosie · 07/11/2018 21:31

Oh well we’re all just such massive dick teases we’ll be flashing our knickers all the time anyway won’t we?

SeaWitchly · 07/11/2018 21:32

Yes, I was also particularly disgusted that the judge in this case, who commented on the victim’s underwear as if it was evidence as to intent to have sexual relations with this particular man (angry), was a woman.

There is a special place in hell for female misogynists like her, along with all the trans handmaidens.

nocoolnamesleft · 07/11/2018 22:28

What century are we in?

Turph · 07/11/2018 22:46

Sickening story. I hope that bastard at least suffers with the guilt of what he knows he did

arranfan · 07/11/2018 22:53

Scumbag stating 'well she wasn't crying'

Just how exactly is it possible to get a rape conviction if this is the way things are done?

Hell, he could probably have "accidentally" killed her and got away with it too.

This story is one of the reasons why the RSE consultation for which the deadline is tonight was so important.

EmbraRocks · 07/11/2018 22:59

failing I remember Lindsay, she is/was my age- the pants she had on had a cartoon on it saying 'lil devil' this apparently meant she welcomed the rape and in fact encouraged it. Vile

Racecardriver · 07/11/2018 23:01

The thing about convicting for tape is that the men has to be penetrating without reasonable belief in consent in order to be convicted. The jury has to be sure of this beyond reasonable doubt. The knickers are neither here nor there (and probably even damaged his case by sling his lawyer look like a bit of a twat). There wasn’t really any evidence beyond the two of them making contradicting allegations and one witness who wasn’t really sure what they saw. That’s not enough to convict someone. Either the police/the prosecution did a shit job, it was one of those instances where there isn’t enough evidence or, he genuinely thought she consented. A lack of cover by doesn’t inevitably mean rape and a rape doesn’t inevitably mean a prosecution. That’s just not how the law works.

heresyandwitchcraft · 07/11/2018 23:01
Sad
EmbraRocks · 07/11/2018 23:01

Oh wait, I have an idea- back to the chastity belts from middle ages?...

pallisers · 07/11/2018 23:02

I always remember the girl who was raped by Roman Polanski saying that the trial was a worse experience than the rape.

I would never ever encourage my daughters to report a rape. It has taken me a long time to get to this point but I am absolutely there now. The stanford rape (the 6 months sentence) and the belfast rape trial were the last straws for me. I was hopeful and optimistic for a long while but now I am not. I would probably report myself because I am older and could probably tolerate the abuse and shaming but no way would I want either of them to go through that. Look at how the Kavanaugh accuser (who was absolutely believable) was mocked and jeered and accused of being a venomous liar by respectable senators and the president (well no surprise there - he is an obvious piece of scum). No way.

That poor girl.

Littlechocolatepumkins · 07/11/2018 23:21

The knickers are neither here nor there I disagree. That a victims underwear can be referred to thus is very much part of the problem with how rape cases are tried and indeed how women are treated. In the Belfast trial i recall the victims underwear being shown in court. Please don't tell us it's neither here nor there when enlightening us on how the law works. Did you read the heartbreaking links earlier? Regardless of any other facts of the trial/case the comments alone are fucking outrageous.

Charley50 · 07/11/2018 23:27

That is terrible, and the Scottish girl's suicide so sad.

pallisers · 07/11/2018 23:36

The knickers are neither here nor there

Really? floating around in the metaphysical world minding their own business were they?

The knickers were in the closing statement and the jury was told to draw its own conclusions about the girl's intentions to have sex based entirely on her knickers. How you can say confidently that they didn't form part of the rational for the jury's verdict is beyond me - unless you were on the jury?

Icantmakeanomelette · 07/11/2018 23:54

I can well believe this.

My case didn't make it to court, didn't go to CPS.

The DCI who reviewed my case said it was because of my "failure to communicate my lack of consent" (was passed out drunk at the time).

I was wearing no knickers, though, so by this sentiment he totally had a point.

Badgerthebodger · 08/11/2018 00:29

Oh god that poor girl. I believe you love.

I’m slightly in shock at the notion that a 17 year old girl, having sex for the first time, enthusiastically consented to being dragged down a muddy alley with a hand at her throat. Is that the message lacy knickers give out? I wonder how many men having sex for the first time enthusiastically consent to being dragged down a muddy alley with a hand at their throat. As a PP says, what is the male equivalent of lacy underwear?

Ah. Not there. Doesn’t exist. Only the women who are still, at 17 years old in 2018, judged by their choice of underwear to have consented to the sort of sex most people would run a mile from. As for the disgusting, no doubt porn-soaked specimen that (allegedly Angry) did this to her - I hope you rot in hell you horrible bastard.

Swipe left for the next trending thread