"Why I did not report my rapist"

pilly · 24-02-2017 03:34PM

Deleted User wrote: »

She's actually spot on there, for some "rape culture" does not mean the person who dabbles in it is a rapist, it's simply about denigration and the objectification of women as merely sexual objects. And he does that in buckets. His misogynism is pretty ugly, he's always using words like "b****" and "P****" as derogatory terms, referring to a reporter using her "nice little ass to get a raise", women "sitting on his d***" etc. etc.

Maybe he does, I don't follow him at all but I do know that he has a public persona he likes to play up to that's all part of the marketing ploy so I wouldn't take anything he says seriously or let it rile me tbf.

One eyed Jack · 24-02-2017 03:35PM

anna080 wrote: »

It just has to be said that when you are being intimate with someone, your actions will speak a million times louder than your words. Yes RMC said no, I do not want to have sex with you. But she also continued to kiss him, repeatedly, continually. He removed her top, she stayed kissing him. He tried to take her pants off, she says no but stays kissing him, he takes them off. There is an element of personal responsibility in her situation. I do not believe she didn't consent. She consented when she decided it was easier to have sex with him then to have an "awkward I don't fancy you conversation". She decided to have sex. That is consenting. In such an intimate, already overly awkward situation, I believe there were wires crossed. He was thinking "she's saying no but her actions are telling me yes". She should have told him she needed to go to the bathroom, got up and switched the light on and left the room. Awkward conversation avoided and apparent rape avoided.

We hardly know what she was thinking (and many people who have been raped aren't nearly as articulate as she is!), let alone what he was thinking, so that supposition on your part could just as easily be countered by me suggesting that he could just as easily have been thinking "fcuking hell, this frigid bitch is breaking my balls, just get on it already!", or he could just as easily have thought - he didn't care for what she wanted or didn't want, in that moment the only thing that was relevant to him was what he wanted, and that's why he followed her up the stairs, into her bedroom, and after he got what he wanted, then he asked her did she want him to leave.

24-02-2017 03:36PM

pilly wrote: »

Maybe he does, I don't follow him at all but I do know that he has a public persona he likes to play up to that's all part of the marketing ploy so I wouldn't take anything he says seriously or let it rile me tbf.

It doesn't rile me, in the sense that he's a misogynist clown, him and so many others, I object but I don't go around fuming about it. I also think it's not good enough to say "ah but his racism and misogyny sells tickets, it's an act", but again others may differ.

ibarelycare · 24-02-2017 03:37PM

Neyite wrote: »

Communication regarding consent needs to be clear - I fully agree.

Do you think that Rosemary, the subject of this particular thread, was clear? I personally think she she was. By her description, she said no a few times, said she didn't want to have sex, and made it clear that she was happy to continue kissing.

To my mind, that's clear communication. She was consenting to A (kissing) and made it clear to her partner she did not consent to B (sex).

She said no to her top coming off. Then it "came off". Did it fall off? No. Did he force it off her? No. She allowed him to take it off after initially saying no.

She said not to her bottoms coming off. Then they "came off". Did they fall off? No. Did he force them off her? No. She allowed him to take them off after initially saying no.

She didn't consent to just kissing. By allowing him to take it further, she consented.

She didn't make it clear that she did not consent to sex. She initially said no, but then allowed her clothes to come off and allowed him to have sex with her. She said in her own words that she "let" him have sex with her.

How any of that is rape is beyond me.

Dyr · 24-02-2017 03:38PM

GritBiscuit wrote: »

Definition of common law rape:

A man commits rape if:

1 - He had sexual intercourse with a woman who at that time does not consent and

2 - He knows she is not consenting or he is reckless as to whether or not she is consenting

Repeatedly saying no is by definition an absence of consent....so this scenario is not so much "bandying around a word like rape" as perfectly describing it...

Do you know when the alleged offence occurred?

Probably not but steam right in anyway, matlock

ibarelycare · 24-02-2017 03:38PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

We hardly know what she was thinking (and many people who have been raped aren't nearly as articulate as she is!), let alone what he was thinking, so that supposition on your part could just as easily be countered by me suggesting that he could just as easily have been thinking "fcuking hell, this frigid bitch is breaking my balls, just get on it already!", or he could just as easily have thought - he didn't care for what she wanted or didn't want, in that moment the only thing that was relevant to him was what he wanted, and that's why he followed her up the stairs, into her bedroom, and after he got what he wanted, then he asked her did she want him to leave.

Yes we do know what she was thinking. She was thinking that she'd rather just let this happen rather than have an awkward conversation. She says it in her blog post.

Outlaw Pete · 24-02-2017 03:41PM

Neyite wrote: »

To my mind, that's clear communication. She was consenting to A (kissing) and made it clear to her partner she did not consent to B (sex).

Yes, that's true... but she then went on to consent to sexual intercourse.... in her own words ffs!

I remember being disgusted at how I had just let him do that. What kind of person was I, who thought it was easier to just let someone have sex with me than to have the awkward “I don’t fancy you” conversation?

What exactly are people not getting here??

You can all keep going on about how many times she said no before then consenting as much as you like, but it won't change the fact that after she said no she then decided to allow the guy to have sex with her.

timmy880 · 24-02-2017 03:43PM

If this went to court and she said "I let him have sex with me" as she said twice in the blog then she would be finished.

Whether it's right or wrong in the context of how uncomfortable she felt or how many times she said no, those words would rule out any rape conviction.

r93kaey5p2izun · 24-02-2017 03:44PM

It's clear that non verbal communication and consent through body language is a big issue. The whole thing around mixed signals is massive.

Lying there not physically resisting while someone penetrates you is not consent imo, especially if you had said a verbal no and even if you have been kissing. Continuing to kiss while someone penetrates you is consent imo, even if you said a verbal no. (It's not clear to me what happened in the author's version of events in this regard so this is not a comment on that particular scenario).

Others are saying they think simply not physically resisting is consent. I disagree but I'm not saying they're legally wrong because I just don't know.

But again, I think further discussion around both sides of sex with an uninterested unwilling partner, with consent, would perhaps give some insight into the different thinking and different interpretations that are out there.

westernlass · 24-02-2017 03:48PM

This isn't a clear cut case obviously. I don't think I would have reported it either and the comments judging those who haven't worry me. I think it's good there's a discussion. I'm not sure how effective the discussion is via the internet in my opinion. It's such an emotional discussion and I was thinking how different everyone's relationship history is and that has a knock on effect on how we view the world.
One of the problems in my opinion is that we are not teaching consent lessons to both male and females in school but also that sex education isn't covering in depth enough clearly the impacts of making decisions to have sex. I don't know how many people realise the emotional effects of having sex especially when you are younger. If this had been done in school, Rosemary may have feel more confident being assertive and saying leave the room now instead of no and then not taking further action. I am not blaming Rosemary, I am observing that if we want to change situations like this we need to empower people at a younger age to try and reduce this type of things happening. It's far too common.

learn_more · 24-02-2017 03:48PM

Rightwing wrote: »

Was 'no' a scream that others in the house would hear?

The facts are we don't know. And I would say the author probably doesn't know either.

Case closed Rosemary

She infers that they guy set about raping her in a calculating way. I.e., waited till she was drunk, took advantage of her good nature, 'her lack of meanness', kissed her a few times in the past in an attempt to suggest they were already something of an item. Suggests she was ripe for prey because she was on the rebound and the wily rapist would have know that and taken advantage of her vulnerability. "She hadn't acted like a rape victims should" because the guy somehow connived to bring about a situation that when he pounced she would behave in exactly that way she did. :rolleyes:

Mountainsandh · 24-02-2017 03:50PM

Neyite wrote: »

Communication regarding consent needs to be clear - I fully agree.

Do you think that Rosemary, the subject of this particular thread, was clear? I personally think she she was. By her description, she said no a few times, said she didn't want to have sex, and made it clear that she was happy to continue kissing.

To my mind, that's clear communication. She was consenting to A (kissing) and made it clear to her partner she did not consent to B (sex).

I think that's the crux of it.

Our ways of interpreting this particular interaction are different.
I have already stated that I don't think she was clear, and I have no problem saying that in my opinion, the little words "yes" or "no" are not always a guarantee that your message is clear.

We are not robots, and we do not respond as such.
She went on with the fumble to the point of having sex.
He misread her signals bringing it all to the point of having sex.

I don't think she made it clear that she did not consent to sex. And remember, she said she decided to "let him".

Glenster · 24-02-2017 03:50PM

Rightwing wrote: »

Was 'no' a giggle no?
Was 'no' a scream that others in the house would hear?
Was 'no' followed by some kissing and fondling?

The facts are we don't know. And I would say the author probably doesn't know either.

Case closed Rosemary

Kissing and fondling does not equal consent to being f*cked. Nor does dancing, nor does wearing those kinds of clothes.

And I think if you're having sex with someone for the first time a giggle no at least needs to be clarified.

retro:electro · 24-02-2017 03:51PM

I'm sure a lot of actual rape victims only wish they had the choice to decide whether or not to stop and have an awkward conversation or continue to be raped. Her post is so offensive on so many levels.

Glenster · 24-02-2017 03:51PM

learn_more wrote: »

She infers that they guy set about raping her in a calculating way. I.e., waited till she was drunk, took advantage of her good nature, 'her lack of meanness', kissed her a few times in the past in an attempt to suggest they were already something of an item. Suggests she was ripe for prey because she was on the rebound and the wily rapist would have know that and taken advantage of her vulnerability. "She hadn't acted like a rape victims should" because the guy somehow conspired to bring about a situation that when he pounced she would behave in exactly that way she did. :rolleyes:

You infer that, I'm pretty sure the author of the blog post doesn't imply it, at least not from my reading.

Little CuChulainn · 24-02-2017 03:54PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Yes, that's true... but she then went on to consent to sexual intercourse.... in her own words ffs!

What exactly are people not getting here??

You can all keep going on about how many times she said no before then consenting as much as you like, but it won't change the fact that after she said no she then decided to allow the guy to have sex with her.

Simply allowing something to happen does not change a no to a yes.

timmy880 · 24-02-2017 03:55PM

Glenster wrote: »

Kissing and fondling does not equal consent to being f*cked. Nor does dancing, nor does wearing those kinds of clothes.

And I think if you're having sex with someone for the first time a giggle no at least needs to be clarified.

They had sex previously.... Wasn't their first time.

Outlaw Pete · 24-02-2017 03:59PM

anna080 wrote: »

I'm sure a lot of actual rape victims only wish they had the choice to decide whether or not to stop and have an awkward conversation or continue to be raped. Her post is so offensive on so many levels.

Exactly.

Letting someone having sex with you (when you are not doing so out of fear of repercussions if you don't) is not the same as someone raping you.

She stopped saying no, in her own words, and she shouldn't have, as doing so was clearly then inferred as her consenting to having sex.

mzungu · 24-02-2017 04:00PM

J Mysterio wrote: »

She has a new post today. Conor McGregor is a potential rapist now.

Conor McGregor and rape culture

This should be a lightning bolt to rape culture deniers everywhere – but don’t get sidetracked by the word “rape.” Conor McGregor isn’t telling us that he condones rape; what he is doing is telling us, very explicitly, that he views women as objects; that he’s invincible; that power (and, arguably, maleness) entitle him to do, touch, take, whatever it is he wants.

That is rape culture – a culture in which women are reduced to objects and men are, above all else, entitled to do with said object whatever they see fit. “I just have a confidence that comes from my big ball sack,” confirms McGregor.

We should be worried – two of the world’s most powerful men frequently speak about themselves like all-powerful gods, and about women as things to be grabbed, groped and ogled. It’s a culture and it’s spreading – how can we teach our children to respect women and men equally, when the world’s most famous fighter, an icon and role model to many, is telling them the exact opposite?

We can only hope that fatherhood will give Conor McGregor a fresh perspective – it might even be worth hoping for a girl, whose existence may just prompt him to rethink his stance on women, what they’re good for and what powerful men are entitled to take from them.

http://rosemarymaccabe.com/conor-mcgregor-problem-machismo/

Nope, that would be a grown man acting like a complete and utter muppet. Attritbuting the actions of Conor McGregor (and Trump) to the man on the street is a bit silly. Can I attribute the actions of Rosemary West and Myra Hindley to femininity? After all, the recent women's march in the USA featured a murderer and a sympathiser of authoritarian communist regimes, so do we take from this that there is a culture of murder and authoritarianism amongst women? No, we don't and I doubt many would either. That kind of cherry picking works both ways but neither are close to the truth.

24-02-2017 04:01PM

timmy880 wrote: »

If this went to court and she said "I let him have sex with me" as she said twice in the blog then she would be finished.

Whether it's right or wrong in the context of how uncomfortable she felt or how many times she said no, those words would rule out any rape conviction.

I couldn't disagree more, in many cases rape victims will admit that they allowed sex to take place. Very often it's in the "because I was afraid/I was too young and scared/he was in a position of authority" context. Which is not to say that any of those apply...but those words "I let him" most certainly do not equate to consent.

On the contrary, if it was demonstrated (and given the lapse of time, it's a big "if") that she repeatedly said no and he proceeded, he would be in a lot of trouble.

Mountainsandh · 24-02-2017 04:03PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Simply allowing something to happen does not change a no to a yes.

That's a nice soundbite, but I think very often actually it does, unless violence is involved.

There was no violence there.

ibarelycare · 24-02-2017 04:06PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I couldn't disagree more, in many cases rape victims will admit that they allowed sex to take place. Very often it's in the "because I was afraid/I was too young and scared/he was in a position of authority" context. Which is not to say that any of those apply...but those words "I let him" most certainly do not equate to consent.

On the contrary, if it was demonstrated (and given the lapse of time, it's a big "if") that she repeatedly said no and he proceeded, he would be in a lot of trouble.

None of these are the case here. Rosemary allowed him to have sex with her, rather than have the "awkward" conversation of telling him she wasn't interested. And now she's crying rape. Despicable.

mzungu · 24-02-2017 04:07PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

That's a nice soundbite, but I think very often actually it does, unless violence is involved.

There was no violence there.

Violence is not necessarily always a feature of rape. There was obviously an uneven power dynamic at play. Hence, this guy carried on after being asked to stop.

pilly · 24-02-2017 04:08PM

mzungu wrote: »

Violence is not necessarily always a feature of rape. There was obviously an uneven power dynamic at play. Hence, this guy carried on after being asked to stop.

Where was the uneven power dynamic? It's not at all obvious.

Mountainsandh · 24-02-2017 04:09PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I couldn't disagree more, in many cases rape victims will admit that they allowed sex to take place. Very often it's in the "because I was afraid/I was too young and scared/he was in a position of authority" context. Which is not to say that any of those apply...but those words "I let him" most certainly do not equate to consent.

On the contrary, if it was demonstrated (and given the lapse of time, it's a big "if") that she repeatedly said no and he proceeded, he would be in a lot of trouble.

When someone is over the age of consent, it is generally acknowledged that they know if they do consent or not. If they allow someone to touch them and there is no fear involved, psychological or physical, then I don't think the situation is as clear cut as you imply.

I would be hoping that the justice system is adequate to make decisions in that regard.

Millicent · 24-02-2017 04:09PM

One thing I think would help in these greyer areas of consent is if women learned to be okay with being seen as a "bitch".

A lot of women, especially in Ireland, are raised to be polite, to not hurt anyone's feelings, and to put other people's comfort before their own. Additionally, Ireland in general seems to me to be a country where all of us, men and women, are conditioned not to see "no" as the end of a conversation.

That Mrs. Doyle sketch is funny but how many of us know people like that who override you when you clearly say "no"? I know my brother is a fucker for that--"have a bite of this. It's nice." "No thanks." "No, have one." "No really, I don't want one." "Take it." etc. etc. Today, he literally held a pastry a centimetre from my mouth until I took a bite. My mother, come to think of it, is the same. My nanny on my dad's side was, too. You'd refuse something and then you'd be badgered into eating it because it was offending her hospitality.

It drives me crazy these days and with a few more years and grey hairs, I'm now comfortable telling my brother to feck off. My mam and my sick, elderly nan...still not so much.

My point is, there has to be a shift in the way Irish society conducts itself so that 1. women and girls feel comfortable saying no and that they expect for that "no" to be taken seriously and 2. that all of us start accepting someone at face value when they say no and respect what they are saying to us.

I can't tell you how many personally uncomfortable situations I found myself in as a teenager/young woman because I didn't want to offend someone by being too direct in saying no. I would say it but, if they pushed back on it, I would begin to become nervous as the risk of offending/angering them ran contrary to my social conditioning to be polite to a fault and to acquiesce for the sake of being a "nice girl".

I've found my willingness to now be perceived as a "bitch" to be incredible freeing. I only wish I could go back to my younger self and to tell her that if you've said "no", and someone refuses to hear it, that you're the one who should get angry/offended and not to worry about the other person's feelings when they are clearly being an ass/pushing the boundaries/being manipulative by refusing to hear you say "no".

So I feel for Rosemary. She said "no" three times and the guy treated it like it was background noise rather than her asserting her wishes. If he had had the respect to take her at her first no, the whole "grey area" people are seeing wouldn't have even been an issue.

And to those people who say she consented by "letting him have sex with her", having sex with a woman who is just "laying there" (in her own words) is not getting consent. If he cared, he would have made sure she was in to it, not laying there prone waiting for it to end.

timmy880 · 24-02-2017 04:11PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I couldn't disagree more, in many cases rape victims will admit that they allowed sex to take place. Very often it's in the "because I was afraid/I was too young and scared/he was in a position of authority" context. Which is not to say that any of those apply...but those words "I let him" most certainly do not equate to consent.

On the contrary, if it was demonstrated (and given the lapse of time, it's a big "if") that she repeatedly said no and he proceeded, he would be in a lot of trouble.

If she describes the story in court exactly as she does in her blog then she is in trouble (in my opinion). She could claim "because I was afraid/I was too young and scared/he was in a position of authority" context but that's not what she describes here. She simply did it to avoid an awkward conversation. Her words.

r93kaey5p2izun · 24-02-2017 04:12PM

Aside from this particular story, I just don't understand the hardliners on each side of this issue. I don't understand why anyone thinks consent is clear cut and simple.

I don't understand those who don't see the grey area of non verbal consent from both sides. I don't understand those who think a verbal no is all that matters no matter the context, and I don't understand those who think successfully insertion of a penis in a vagina in a non violent scenario means consent has occurred. How can people be so black and white? And what do they hope to achieve? Both sides sound like they're trying to convince and reassure themselves.

givyjoe · 24-02-2017 04:12PM

Millicent wrote: »

One thing I think would help in these greyer areas of consent is if women learned to be okay with being seen as a "bitch".

A lot of women, especially in Ireland, are raised to be polite, to not hurt anyone's feelings, and to put other people's comfort before their own. Additionally, Ireland in general seems to me to be a country where all of us, men and women, are conditioned not to see "no" as the end of a conversation.

That Mrs. Doyle sketch is funny but how many of us know people like that who override you when you clearly say "no"? I know my brother is a fucker for that--"have a bite of this. It's nice." "No thanks." "No, have one." "No really, I don't want one." "Take it." etc. etc. Today, he literally held a pastry a centimetre from my mouth until I took a bite. My mother, come to think of it, is the same. My nanny on my dad's side was, too. You'd refuse something and then you'd be badgered into eating it because it was offending her hospitality.

It drives me crazy these days and with a few more years and grey hairs, I'm now comfortable telling my brother to feck off. My mam and my sick, elderly nan...still not so much.

My point is, there has to be a shift in the way Irish society conducts itself so that 1. women and girls feel comfortable saying no and that they expect for that "no" to be taken seriously and 2. that all of us start accepting someone at face value when they say no and respect what they are saying to us.

I can't tell you how many personally uncomfortable situations I found myself in as a teenager/young woman because I didn't want to offend someone by being too direct in saying no. I would say it but, if they pushed back on it, I would begin to become nervous as the risk of offending/angering them ran contrary to my social conditioning to be polite to a fault and to acquiesce for the sake of being a "nice girl".

I've found my willingness to now be perceived as a "bitch" to be incredible freeing. I only wish I could go back to my younger self and to tell her that if you've said "no", and someone refuses to hear it, that you're the one who should get angry/offended and not to worry about the other person's feelings when they are clearly being an ass/pushing the boundaries/being manipulative by refusing to hear you say "no".

So I feel for Rosemary. She said "no" three times and the guy treated it like it was background noise rather than her asserting her wishes. If he had had the respect to take her at her first no, the whole "grey area" people are seeing wouldn't have even been an issue.

And to those people who say she consented by "letting him have sex with her", having sex with a woman who is just "laying there" (in her own words) is not getting consent. If he cared, he would have made sure she was in to it, not laying there prone waiting for it to end.

Being too polite or afraid to say no isn't exclusive to women.

retro:electro · 24-02-2017 04:13PM

A lot of people are using this thread as a place of projection and throwing out irrelevant sound bites.
Rape is disgusting, brutal and horrible. I have worked along side rape victims. I've seen the after effects and its manifestations. Christ though. I've never, ever come across someone who has, 15 years after the situation, decided she was raped, wrote a blog post about it, plugged it on every social platform, bragged about the traffic it's getting, and post a crying face selfie in order to further promote your blog post. It's. Just. Incredible. I will not get into what I personally think of RMC, because for now that is neither here nor there. But the facts are, she was in a position of privilege that night as, she had a CHOICE, which is a thing that other victims do not have. She decided to have sex with this person because she didn't want to tell him she didn't fancy him. That is the crux of it! That is it! That is not rape.

"Why I did not report my rapist"

Comments