"Why I did not report my rapist"

groovyg

jameorahiely wrote: »

On the facebook one of her "fans" was telling people "they're probably a rapist too" to anyone who disagreed. :eek:

When it comes to influencers/bloggers/vloggers...you can't comment on their social media if you don't agree with them otherwise you will get lynched. Think of the iguana and snake scene from Planet Earth 2 their followers will come out and tear you to shreds.

meeeeh

Some got all Christmases together today. They could get anywhere with being outraged by someone having a cleaner, so finally something that will keep on giving and giving. Make sure you squeeze every inch out of it, it might be another three weeks before you get another chance.

retro:electro

But hey! She's doing exactly what I said she would do a few hours ago, cherry picking posts, altering them (apparently I'm a man's rights activist) and feeding them to her echo chamber on Twitter so they applaud and praise her.

Calhoun

anna080 wrote: »

So now she's labelling anyone who disagrees with her as a Men's Rights Activist. Ya, she's not very bright.

The circle of life for the imported America SJW identity politics has been completed. Somebody with media connections hook her up she needs to start writing her book now.

pilly

Calhoun wrote:

The circle of life for the imported America SJW identity politics has been completed. Somebody with media connections hook her up she needs to start writing her book now.

What's SJW? I can't keep up with all the initials on here?

jameorahiely

pilly wrote: »

What's SJW? I can't keep up with all the initials on here?

Social Justice warrior

TheChizler

infogiver wrote: »

Why do you think she should be allowed to go unchallenged?

I've never said she should go unchallenged. I've already said I disagree with her and I believe it was the wrong thing to do.

kend1973

An astonishing thread - luckily the courts are run by more balanced and sensible people than many that posted on this and the attention seeking "blogger". The fact you don't fancy a guy/girl and regretted years later you had sex with them is a bad decision not rape. Unless half the country are rapists.

timmy880

I've showed the wife and a friend of hers the blog article...

They both said it's not rape. They're not however social influencers so that may affect their viewpoint.

Does this make me and herself an MRA or not?

daheff

Maybe this girl should name her 'rapist' let him sue her for slander and see what the courts think.

From my reading if this, she wasnt raped. She might not have wanted to have sex, but SHE allowed the guy to have sex with her. (From her description of what happened) She didnt fight him off, she didnt call for help...she said no, but still allowed him to carry on with her. ...and mainly cos she didnt want to have an awkward conversation.

Really sounds to me that she had sex and regrets it(like a lot of people after alcohol).

timmy880

timmy880 wrote: »

I've showed the wife and a friend of hers the blog article...

They both said it's not rape. They're not however social influencers so that may affect their viewpoint.

Does this make me and herself an MRA or not?

It makes herself an MRA definitely

But here's the thing..... we're currently awaiting word back from media studies think-tank at trinners to confirm that you are now officially a social influencer

Grats my boy you made it, you made it big

retro:electro

groovyg wrote: »

She's obviously following the thread

Also, can I just pick up on something she said here. She said 97% of RAPISTS do not get convicted. So are you automatically a rapist before conviction now?! And are assumed a rapist even when acquitted. Surely she means 97% of people ACCUSED of rape. This girl has no clue.

B.A._Baracus

So she's on the defensive with this now?


Hmm. I reckon her next blog post will be about the "negative feedback" and all that crap. Come off as the victim in all this.

pilly

jameorahiely wrote:

Social Justice warrior

Ah jesus, these things are just getting out of hand.

cinnamony

She has over 26k followers on twitter but very little interaction meaning she's using bots. I wouldn't be too worried about her 'followers' simply because the majority dont exist.

Thankfully.

B.A._Baracus

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

So she's on the defensive with this now?


Hmm. I reckon her next blog post will be about the "negative feedback" and all that crap. Come off as the victim in all this.

She did one there bitching about Conor McGregor and Toxic masculinity, shes going down the LON route now it seems

Four Phucs Ache

One night I was wrecked tired and collapsed into bed , my wife rolled on top of me and hinted she wanted a cuddle , I said no I'm too wrecked, need to sleep , she started away anyway, I said no again I really need to sleep, she said tough luck and worked away, I let her have her fun and went to sleep.Slept like a log.
Does this mean my wife is a rapist?

It does in its fook.

mzungu

pilly wrote: »

Ah jesus, these things are just getting out of hand.

Ohhh, you ain't seen nothing. There are loads and abbreviations get longer for the fringe groupings of these movements!

B.A._Baracus

cinnamony wrote: »

She has over 26k followers on twitter but very little interaction meaning she's using bots. I wouldn't be too worried about her 'followers' simply because the majority dont exist.

Thankfully.

She just created a poll asking if her followers are bots :pac: She's clearly reading this thread lol.


Hi Rose. I think you're full of crap :pac: and it must be really annoying you that people are seeing through your blog post.

Ben Gadot

cinnamony wrote: »

She has over 26k followers on twitter but very little interaction meaning she's using bots. I wouldn't be too worried about her 'followers' simply because the majority dont exist.

Thankfully.

Would anyone really be that arsed...honest question?

cinnamony

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

She just created a poll asking if her followers are bots :pac: She's clearly reading this thread lol.


Hi Rose. I think you're full of crap :pac: and it must be really annoying you that people are seeing through your blog post.

Thats hillarious!

Anything related to social media can be botted, youtube views, youtube subs, instagram likes, followers, polls etc...

Pretty rich that she thinks a poll will prove they're real. :pac:

Ben Gadot

Ben Gadot wrote: »

Would anyone really be that arsed...honest question?

the couple of blue haired, permanently outraged third wave feminists who are always the victims of course

Wibbs

mzungu wrote: »

Jaysus, the MRA and their "philosophy" have been routinely debunked numerous times on Boards. Apart from a few banned posters, you rarely come across an actual MRA around these parts.

Hell I've nuked a few of them in my time and yet some would think of me as a supporter of that guff. And I am not. As for MGTOW? Yeah mate, "you're going your own way" because you've likely little choice in the matter.

Throwing that out there as a label for people who disagree with you is juvenile stuff.

Yep. Though colour me shocked. This guff(among other imported Yank guff)is all about the juvenilisation of people. In this case grown women. Not a big shock as it found a womb in college kids and their gilded cage Peter Pan "lecturers".

anna080 wrote: »

Ya know what really tickles me? A lot of the mentions of praise she has been getting on Twitter are from people who call themselves "social justice warriors". Christ. This is the total opposite of social justice.

Again we're seeing the wholesale absorption of the daft American college campus childish view of the world.

Penny Tration wrote: »

Equality means equality, not special treatment.

But apparently being an ACTUAL feminist who believes in ACTUAL equality nowadays means that you've got some internalized self hatred and adore the "patriarchy," who taught you to think this way.

Ah here PT, are you suggesting adults must take some responsibility? Ya mad thing ya.

LightlyGo wrote: »

Well she's pretty much said the definitive word on it herself now in a Facebook post. She wasn't afraid, she didn't want to refuse him out of politeness.

How she can call it rape I don't know. It's a great shame she wouldn't take responsibility for her part in it, it could've been the start of an empowering conversation about being conscious of the decisions you make and the consequence of not being mature enough to assert yourself in intimate situations. Laying it at someone else's door, ruining their reputation, was never going to be an answer for her, a positive example for young women who follow her blog or for victims of abuse. Instead they've had the concept of rape diluted by applying it to a situation where consent is given.

From Rosemary's Facebook :

It doesn't fit the catechism of the most Holy Church of the Perpetual Victim LG.

anna080 wrote: »

Christ. She even admits he would not be found guilty in a court of law, yet she's still happy to call him a rapist and continually tell people he raped her. What a stupid irresponsible idiot. It's actually depressing.

Oh she'll get enough hysterics and histrionics to agree with her. The worrying part is if she and her bedfellows whine loudly enough they could well reach the political ear.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Hell I've nuked a few of them in my time and yet some would think of me as a supporter of that guff. And I am not. As for MGTOW? Yeah mate, "you're going your own way" because you've likely little choice in the matter.


Yep. Though colour me shocked. This guff(among other imported Yank guff)is all about the juvenilisation of people. In this case grown women. Not a big shock as it found a womb in college kids and their gilded cage Peter Pan "lecturers".

Again we're seeing the wholesale absorption of the daft American college campus childish view of the world.

Ah here PT, are you suggesting adults must take some responsibility? Ya mad thing ya.

It doesn't fit the catechism of the most Holy Church of the Perpetual Victim LG.

Oh she'll get enough hysterics and histrionics to agree with her. The worrying part is if she and her bedfellows whine loudly enough they could well reach the political ear.

With quotas in place, itll happen sooner rather than later

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I think that attitude towards men is dangerous though. That you can regret sex then label them as a rapist and you're not a proper woman or belong in the sisterhood should you not feel this way or agree that men are pigs.

I had one awful experience which at the time made me skeptical of getting intimate with anyone else however, some of my closest friends, the people who've treated me the best and kept me safe have also been men and I would be scared for them going forward that they might find themselves branded a rapist because a woman changed her mind after the fact.

Wibbs

anna080 wrote: »

Also, can I just pick up on something she said here. She said 97% of RAPISTS do not get convicted. So are you automatically a rapist before conviction now?! And are assumed a rapist even when acquitted. Surely she means 97% of people ACCUSED of rape. This girl has no clue.

IMH A, you nailed it when you said "this girl".

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

So she's on the defensive with this now?


Hmm. I reckon her next blog post will be about the "negative feedback" and all that crap. Come off as the victim in all this.

Grist to the mill I'd reckon. No publicity is bad publicity to the troll and attention seeking missile. Indeed I have found the brickbats are more of a turn on to the type than the echo chamber support. The support just reinforces their worldview, while the dissenters entrench it.

pilly wrote: »

Ah jesus, these things are just getting out of hand.

+1000. I say anytime we encounter any Irish person saying mom/MAGA/cuck/PUS/store/MGTOW/trigger warning/SJW/Rape culture/any other adolescent American utter nonsense in earnest(double points if they utter this in a mid Atlantic twang), we should roundly cuff them about the ears until they cop the fcuk on.

One eyed Jack

LexieOnRale wrote: »

I would be scared for them going forward that they might find themselves branded a rapist because a woman changed her mind after the fact.

If they didn't want to be branded a rapist, it's probably in their own interests then that they don't act like one. The woman in question in this particular case didn't change her mind after the fact, she told the guy no three times before the fact.

I understand that you'd be worried about men being branded rapists and the rest of it, I would be too, which is why I would instill in them the personal responsibility that if the other person says no, it should only be necessary for them to say no once. After that, any interaction should end, rather than leave themselves open to a possible allegation of rape.

Ben Gadot

I told a friend once that I wasn't comfortable with her advances, but she swooned me enough in her drunken state that I gave in with a kiss and left it at that. I put her in a taxi and told her to text me the next day when she was fresh.

She didn't text me and I saw it as case closed. She had the class as well to meet me on a later date to confirm she had no feelings for me.

That was a woman mature enough to stand over her decisions and she had balls. I never said it to her because I was so wrapped up in my own sense of failure, but I respected the hell out of her even if I might have faltered with a careless comment.

I've no real point anyway, as I said multiple nos says everything and I'd never defend the sad case who pretends not to hear it. I guess I just feel uncomfortable about where we're going as a society, a society increasingly about deflecting guilt.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If they didn't want to be branded a rapist, it's probably in their own interests then that they don't act like one. The woman in question in this particular case didn't change her mind after the fact, she told the guy no three times before the fact.

I understand that you'd be worried about men being branded rapists and the rest of it, I would be too, which is why I would instill in them the personal responsibility that if the other person says no, it should only be necessary for them to say no once. After that, any interaction should end, rather than leave themselves open to a possible allegation of rape.

You go home with a girl after a night out, she's drunk you're drunk but there's consent. She wakes up the next day and realises you look like you were on fire and had been put out with a shovel. She regrets sleeping with you, so she withdraws the consent, but bearing in mind while the act was happening, there was no resistance. It's not fair on him going forward because he can't unsleep with someone if she states afterwards she didn't want it

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

She told him no three times BUT STILL kissed him, let him undress her and decided it was "easier" to let him have sex than tell him she wasn't interested. If I am having sex and tell him stop, I expect him to stop. If we're having sex and I'm telling him to stop while kissing his neck, do I want him to stop? Probably not.