The sex myth

sbsquarepants

Trudiha wrote: »

Of course, I can't look into anyone's soul and tell you want they are really thinking but I'm fairly experienced in calling abusers on their behaviour and I honestly think that the majority of abusers who've told me that they didn't think they were doing anything wrong were sincere.
...

I simply don't believe this. You can not un knowingly rape someone, i'm sorry but you just can't. Anyone who says they did, is talking out their arse.

Rosy Posy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Has anyone here said that those girls were sluts? And just to be clear for a second here we're calling cases without convictions rapes? I just want to be clear for the future.

Both the Steubenville girl and Rehteah Parsons were called sluts to their faces and online after being sexually assaulted while passed out. Rehteah Parsons took her own life.

Most rapes are unreported because of the fear of not being believed and of having to relive the experience in front of strangers and the social stigma attached. Add to that that cases where obvious violence was not used and only the victim and perpetrator were present and you're down to a tiny percentage of rapists that are actually convicted.

Here is a graph from an FBI study

http://jezebel.com/5973904/show-this-depressing-graph-to-the-rape-apologist-in-your-life

Rosy Posy

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I simply don't believe this. You can not un knowingly rape someone, i'm sorry but you just can't. Anyone who says they did, is talking out their arse.

What if the perpetrator is drunk?

What if the victim too drunk to give consent but is still conscious?

What if the victim was kissing the perpetrator but then passed out?

It DOES happen and the reason that this can be unclear to victims and perpetrators is because of rape culture.

Chucky the tree

Rosy Posy wrote: »

This is a stop gap measure. In the broader sense it is saying 'make sure it's not you that gets raped but that other drunker, less dressed girl', when we should be looking deeper to try and solve the social problems that lead people to rape.

Why is "victim blaming" only seen as a bad thing when it's sexual assualt? I mean, I'd hazard a guess that it's 99% likely that you lock your front door when you leave your house or go to sleep at night - do you consider that as just a stop gap measure and feel you are encouraging a "burglary culture"?

Rosy Posy

Rosy Posy wrote: »

Both the Steubenville girl and Rehteah Parsons were called sluts to their faces and online after being sexually assaulted while passed out. Rehteah Parsons took her own life.

By who? Locals and trolls.

Most rapes are unreported because of the fear of not being believed and of having to relive the experience in front of strangers and the social stigma attached. Add to that that cases where obvious violence was not used and only the victim and perpetrator were present and you're down to a tiny percentage of rapists that are actually convicted.

You're describing the law, how would you change it? And would it just be for rape?

Here is a graph from an FBI study

http://jezebel.com/5973904/show-this-depressing-graph-to-the-rape-apologist-in-your-life

See you might think that by hiding a personal attack in a URL I wouldn't notice it but you were wrong. I'm not a rape apologist and there's point debating you when you're going to resort to petty attacks like that to anyone who disagrees with a single point you make.
Enjoy your high horse, I'm out before I react and get an infraction or a banning.

Trudiha

tritium wrote: »

Dammit, enough, this is just tiring. Like another poster said it's like talking to a brick wall. Just using the phrase rape culture over and over won't make it any truer. Frankly it's disrespectful to real victims of rape to use them to push an agenda.

For a long time, I sat with 'the real victims of rape'* every day. I listened to them blame themselves for the horror that had been imposed on them while I helped them to clean themselves up. I go on about rape culture because I've seen first hand what it leads to.

Incidental is there a less real victim of rape, are you alluding to the parters or parents or women who've been raped or something else?

Rape culture as it's being used here is little more than a social engineering term to push a particular viewpoint and frankly the way it's been used is patronising, demeaning and wrong. It's little more than an attempt to perpetuate the all men are potential rapists stereotype that has poisoned so much debate around these issues and kept a slew of academic grant money rolling in. It's a topic that has already received an appropriate academic reposte from feminists such as Christina Hoff.

I'd love a bit of social engineering. I'd love it if we were able to engineer it so that no one ever mention what a rape victim was wearing, that she was walking around like she was a free citizen when she was raped or who she'd had sex with in the past. I'd really love to have a discussion where women's bodies weren't equated with fifty euro notes that needed to be locked up because that's the only sensible thing to do with a woman fifty euro note. I'd love it if we could engineer out of our thinking a hierarchy of victims, if every single rape was taken seriously.

Gambas

Trudiha wrote: »

I'm not of the opinion that most rapists are scumbags, there are simply too many of them for that. I'd be the first to admit that it's hard for young men growing up in a culture where they are surrounded by images of women who appear to be available to them, where they are told that women say 'no' when they mean 'yes'. When they are told that women who aren't covered from head to toe are begging for it and that women walking alone at night are fair game. To have all of that ****e fed to you, would obviously mess with your head and, sadly, it's exactly what men hear from other men.

In a thread full of myths, that's the Daddy.

tritium

Rosy Posy wrote: »

What if the perpetrator is drunk?

What if the victim too drunk to give consent but is still conscious?

What if the victim was kissing the perpetrator but then passed out?

It DOES happen and the reason that this can be unclear to victims and perpetrators is because of rape culture.

So just to be clear that I'm picking you up right: both the male and the female are too drunk to consent to anything, but if sexual activity happens we'll just assume the male is the principal instigator and therefore a rapist? Have I missed something here? Because I'm really unclear why consent is a one way street in this scenario?

--Kaiser--

Trudiha wrote: »

I'd love a bit of social engineering. I'd love it if we were able to engineer it so that no one ever mention what a rape victim was wearing, that she was walking around like she was a free citizen when she was raped or who she'd had sex with in the past. I'd really love to have a discussion where women's bodies weren't equated with fifty euro notes that needed to be locked up because that's the only sensible thing to do with a woman fifty euro note. I'd love it if we could engineer out of our thinking a hierarchy of victims, if every single rape was taken seriously.

I didn't equate a woman with a 50 euro note, I analogised one crime with another crime. You seriously lack in reading comprehension and/or rational thinking

sbsquarepants

Rosy Posy wrote: »

What if the perpetrator is drunk? .

What if they are? I know right from wrong when i'm drunk.

Rosy Posy wrote: »

What if the victim too drunk to give consent but is still conscious?.

If you're too drunk to talk, you're too drunk for sex - that's hardly news to anyone.

Rosy Posy wrote: »

What if the victim was kissing the perpetrator but then passed out?.

If you're unconscious, that's a no - again, it's hardly a difficult concept.

Rosy Posy wrote: »

It DOES happen and the reason that this can be unclear to victims and perpetrators is because of rape culture.

It does happen, all to often unfortunately but it's not because of any "rape culture" it's because some people are assholes. They will be assholes regardless of the world around them (look at john terry for example - scum, and will be till the day he dies, despite having the world at his feet)
Do you honestly think that someone having sex with an unconscious woman thinks what they are doing is ok? Or is shocked to hear that maybe the woman wouldn't like that? Or thinks wouldn't it be funny if someone done this to my sister? They know well what they're doing is wrong, they just don't care because they are assholes.

Trudiha

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

I didn't equate a woman with a 50 euro note, I analogised one crime with another crime. You seriously lack in reading comprehension and/or rational thinking

No, you've suggest that women should be covered up and not 'tempt' potential rapists. You've trivialised rape and you've blamed rape victims.

Rosy Posy

tritium wrote: »

Frankly it's disrespectful to real victims of rape to use them to push an agenda.

You've already heard from two rape survivors on here already and your post is the one that's being disrespectful.

tritium wrote: »

Rape culture as it's being used here is little more than a social engineering term to push a particular viewpoint and frankly the way it's been used is patronising, demeaning and wrong.

I'm sure it all seems academic to you until you find yourself on the other side of it. Until you have people saying, 'but she was drunk' or 'she slept with him before' or 'well what does she expect the way she dresses' or even 'she's just making it up because she changed her mind when she was sober and didn't want her boyfriend to think she'd cheated on him'. Until you have your sexual history being discussed by the community in your trial by gossip. Or when you have your friends counselling you not to use the word rape lest you be branded a false accuser.

Everyone is getting all caught up in equating a slap on the ass with rape. But there is a spectrum of sexual assault, and a society that condones laughing off unwanted sexual contact and disrespecting personal boundaries is also a society that leads a woman (or man) to shrug off waking up naked beside someone they have no memory of having sex with as a consequence of a heavy night on the beer.

lemansky

Trudiha wrote: »

No, you've suggest that women should be covered up and not 'tempt' potential rapists. You've trivialised rape and you've blamed rape victims.

Impressive jump there. I genuinely fail to see how you can get that as being the net take home message from the points that the poster you quoted and others are making.

tritium

Trudiha wrote: »

No, you've suggest that women should be covered up and not 'tempt' potential rapists. You've trivialised rape and you've blamed rape victims.

No he didn't, and I don't doubt for a second that you realise that

Henlars67

tritium wrote: »

So just to be clear that I'm picking you up right: both the male and the female are too drunk to consent to anything, but if sexual activity happens we'll just assume the male is the principal instigator and therefore a rapist? Have I missed something here? Because I'm really unclear why consent is a one way street in this scenario?

Ya, that's also a problem I have with the "too drunk to consent" concept.

If I was in reasonable shape and was with a girl who was extremely drunk there is no way I'd even attempt to have sex with her and no other normal thinking man would either.

But if two people fall up the road together with one as drunk as the other and end up having sex who is responsible? Either or both could have been the instigator. If the female regrets it in the morning, is it rape on the part of the male?

What if the male regrets it? What's the story then?

smcgiff

Trudiha wrote: »

No, you've suggest that women should be covered up and not 'tempt' potential rapists. You've trivialised rape and you've blamed rape victims.

You're going out of your way to find fault - in an ideal world everyone could walk around with 50 euro notes hanging out of the arse pockets or women could be safe walking alone.

But we all accept we do not live in an ideal world and need to be cognisant of that.

You can argue it's your right to live in an ideal world and that's fine, but in the mean time we need to be careful - all of us.

Rosy Posy

tritium wrote: »

So just to be clear that I'm picking you up right: both the male and the female are too drunk to consent to anything, but if sexual activity happens we'll just assume the male is the principal instigator and therefore a rapist? Have I missed something here? Because I'm really unclear why consent is a one way street in this scenario?

I don't think that if both the male and female are too drunk to consent that sex could happen.

When I mentioned the perpetrator being drunk it was in regards to their inhibitions being lowered and their reading of the situation being off.

I do think that a drunk/unconscious male can be raped by a man or a woman and my heart goes out to these men for the difficulty in speaking out without shame and social stigma.

sbsquarepants

Rosy Posy wrote: »

Everyone is getting all caught up in equating a slap on the ass with rape. But there is a spectrum of sexual assault, and a society that condones laughing off unwanted sexual contact and disrespecting personal boundaries is also a society that leads a woman (or man) to shrug off waking up naked beside someone they have no memory of having sex with as a consequence of a heavy night on the beer.

So what are you supposed to do? Breathalise every man or woman you score with? If two people meet in a nightclub and wake up naked the following morning with no memory of what happened (as has happened me several times and i'm sure happens most people at some stage) what crime has taken place?

Rosy Posy

sbsquarepants wrote: »

So what are you supposed to do? Breathalise every man or woman you score with? If two people meet in a nightclub and wake up naked the following morning with no memory of what happened (as has happened me several times and i'm sure happens most people at some stage) what crime has taken place?

I guess it depends on whether one person was significantly drunker, and whether consent was obtained.

Trudiha

smcgiff wrote: »

You're going out of your way to find fault - in an ideal world everyone could walk around with 50 euro notes hanging out of the arse pockets or women could be safe walking alone.

But we all accept we do not live in an ideal world and need to be cognisant of that.

You can argue it's your right to live in an ideal world and that's fine, but in the mean time we need to be careful - all of us.

To be honest, I don't have to go far out of my way to find fault with a society in which so many women are raped or suffer sexual violence. I don't have to go far out of my way to be offended by the idea that this world is far from ideal and that there is nothing we can do about it. If we changed our attitudes towards sexual violence, less of it would happen. If we changed out attitudes about where women can walk and what they can wear, more rapists would be convinced and there would be fewer rapes.

I find it frustrating to hear, over and over again from seemingly decent people that rape is wrong but that some women are more rapable than others and we just have to accept that.

sbsquarepants

And if neither can remember? Then what.
Also the whole if consent was obtained thing is a bit dodgy - i don't think i've ever obtained consent from anyone in my whole sexual history. I assumed it was given based on their actions, if anyone said stop or didn't seem too keen, i certainly stopped but i honestly can't remember ever asking anyone for permision. Does that make me a rapist?

--Kaiser--

Trudiha wrote: »

If we changed out attitudes about where women can walk and what they can wear, more rapists would be convinced and there would be fewer rapes.

No, no, no. It's not 'attitudes' that cause rape, it's rapists. Someone thinking walking a dodgy area on your own is not a good idea (for men or women) does not create rapists, murderers or muggers. You are really not the best person to be working in a rape crisis centre.

I find it frustrating to hear, over and over again from seemingly decent people that rape is wrong but that some women are more rapable than others and we just have to accept that.

Never heard anyone say that

smcgiff

Trudiha wrote: »

To be honest, I don't have to go far out of my way to find fault with a society in which so many women are raped or suffer sexual violence. I don't have to go far out of my way to be offended by the idea that this world is far from ideal and that there is nothing we can do about it. If we changed our attitudes towards sexual violence, less of it would happen. If we changed out attitudes about where women can walk and what they can wear, more rapists would be convinced and there would be fewer rapes.

I find it frustrating to hear, over and over again from seemingly decent people that rape is wrong but that some women are more rapable than others and we just have to accept that.

Where you're wrong is that you think certain people can change their attitude. It's a bit like psychopaths - there's no reasoning with a psychopath.

There are simply people out there that will consider rape as an option. What can we do about that?

Czarcasm

One expression in common everyday use that I personally find particularly disgusting and trivialising of the act of rape is the use of the word "frape", as in somebody else having accessed your account on facebook and posting on your behalf.

The casual use of the word rape in itself in everyday common language use is trivialising the act of rape.

K-9

Rosy Posy wrote: »

Yes. It's about a culture where there is a lack of respect for personal boundaries. I find that that ladette culture of 'if you can't beat them join them' deplorable. It has done nothing for the feminist cause, or the humanist cause for that matter.

If I could thank this a thousand times I would, so true and valid not just with the groping thing.

--Kaiser--

Czarcasm wrote: »

One expression in common everyday use that I personally find particularly disgusting and trivialising of the act of rape is the use of the word "frape", as in somebody else having accessed your account on facebook and posting on your behalf.

The casual use of the word rape in itself in everyday common language use is trivialising the act of rape.

This I agree with

sbsquarepants

Trudiha wrote: »

. If we changed our attitudes towards sexual violence, less of it would happen. If we changed out attitudes about where women can walk and what they can wear, more rapists would be convinced and there would be fewer rapes. .

I don't know a single person who doesn't view rape or sexual violence as abhorrant. Except rapists!
Good luck changing their views, in the mean time i'd advise women to try minimise their risks!

Trudiha wrote: »

. I find it frustrating to hear, over and over again from seemingly decent people that rape is wrong but that some women are more rapable than others and we just have to accept that.

Well we all realise that some people are more robbable than others, think american tourists with bum bags stuffed with cash and thousand quid cameras hanging out of them walking around the inner city??
You hear of people going off to war zones etc and think, they are just asking for trouble.
How can you not see the similarities?

tritium

Trudiha wrote: »

Incidental is there a less real victim of rape, are you alluding to the parters or parents or women who've been raped or something else?

Ooh nice twisting i words to try to find the offence. You'll notice I never mentioned any other type of victim but you somehow managed to find some outrage in there. Oh most definitely I mean something else, since all of these are also in some way victims.

I'm actually referring to the academic industry to make the statistics look "right" and ensure that the slew of grant money keeps flowing. A good example is detailed in the following

http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9502/sommers.html

By the previously mentioned dr Sommers. In effect once the right message is given, the attitude is utterly indifferent to the victims

I'd love a bit of social engineering. I'd love it if we were able to engineer it so that no one ever mention what a rape victim was wearing, that she was walking around like she was a free citizen when she was raped or who she'd had sex with in the past. I'd really love to have a discussion where women's bodies weren't equated with fifty euro notes that needed to be locked up because that's the only sensible thing to do with a woman fifty euro note. I'd love it if we could engineer out of our thinking a hierarchy of victims, if every single rape was taken seriously.

again you go looking for the offence. All of the points you mention above have been fairly effectively dismantled by other posters

Sleepy

In fantasy land everything is black and white, unfortunately, we live in the real world where everything is in shades of grey.

The commonly accepted usage of the term "sexual assault" implies prolonged molestation or the forcing of a sexual act that doesn't quite qualify as rape. Using the term to describe a fleeting unwanted sexual advance such as a hand on your knee is equating these acts and either trivialises one or sensationalises the other. Associating sensationalist words with acts that don't adhere to the common use of those words makes one out to be a screeching lunatic that's easily dismissed.

Teaching your daughter that certain routes aren't safe to walk at night, that she should be aware of her surroundings, that she should keep a close eye on her drink and not accept one from someone she doesn't know isn't in any way condoning sexual violence or engendering a belief that such things are okay. It's preparing her for the real world and no different to teaching your son not to walk home from a night out or not to take a particular route.

If the former is part or "rape culture" the latter logically becomes part of "violent assault culture".

The problem people have with the term "Rape Culture" is that it's hysterical. There is no equating an unwanted pinch / grope / slap on the arse (whether you consider it to be sexual assault or not) with rape. While neither are acceptable behaviour in civilised company they are at very different ends of the spectrum of unacceptable behviour.

Working in bars throughout my college years I'd have been groped, pinched or felt up on a weekly basis. Once I even had a woman walk up to me and unzip my fly observing that there was nothing I could do about it without dropping the large stacks of glasses I was holding at the time. TBH, I found that one amusing even if she wasn't someone I'd have welcomed a sexual advance from. Were I to categorise those incidents as sexual assault, and on the basis of assessment being espoused by some in this thread I should have, I believe I'd be trivialising "real" sexual assault.

--Kaiser--

Sleepy wrote: »

In fantasy land everything is black and white, unfortunately, we live in the real world where everything is in shades of grey.

The commonly accepted usage of the term "sexual assault" implies prolonged molestation or the forcing of a sexual act that doesn't quite qualify as rape. Using the term to describe a fleeting unwanted sexual advance such as a hand on your knee is equating these acts and either trivialises one or sensationalises the other. Associating sensationalist words with acts that don't adhere to the common use of those words makes one out to be a screeching lunatic that's easily dismissed.

Teaching your daughter that certain routes aren't safe to walk at night, that she should be aware of her surroundings, that she should keep a close eye on her drink and not accept one from someone she doesn't know isn't in any way condoning sexual violence or engendering a belief that such things are okay. It's preparing her for the real world and no different to teaching your son not to walk home from a night out or not to take a particular route.

If the former is part or "rape culture" the latter logically becomes part of "violent assault culture".

The problem people have with the term "Rape Culture" is that it's hysterical. There is no equating an unwanted pinch / grope / slap on the arse (whether you consider it to be sexual assault or not) with rape. While neither are acceptable behaviour in civilised company they are at very different ends of the spectrum of unacceptable behviour.

Working in bars throughout my college years I'd have been groped, pinched or felt up on a weekly basis. Once I even had a woman walk up to me and unzip my fly observing that there was nothing I could do about it without dropping the large stacks of glasses I was holding at the time. TBH, I found that one amusing even if she wasn't someone I'd have welcomed a sexual advance from. Were I to categorise those incidents as sexual assault, and on the basis of assessment being espoused by some in this thread I should have, I believe I'd be trivialising "real" sexual assault.

Great post. But be prepared to be accused of being a rape apologist or something similar from some of the pitchfork wielding nutjobs in this thread