"Why I did not report my rapist"

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 27-02-2017 11:53AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

That's what I'm saying, like if someone tells you that they want you to f*ck them, that's consent. If someone literally says "I don't want to have sex" and then they never actually say that they've changed their mind, that's very definitively not consent.

Ok so we are agreed up to this point. There's no doubt she did tell him she didn't want to have sex, but AFTER this, she continues to kiss him and remove her clothes. I'm not a mind reader but I doubt he just wanted to see the human body in its natural state when he was undressing her

timmy880 · 27-02-2017 11:53AM

Didn't check Boards over the weekend and this thread has the same arguments on it as it did 70 pages ago on Friday night.

There will be no conclusion reached on whether or not this is considered rape (those who have the same opinions on Friday have the same opinions on Monday) but what is important is the discussion and actions around consent and by deleting comments from male and females she doesn't agree with on Facebook, she is narrowing the parameters of the discussion to simple male bashing.

If that was her objective then fair play but I thought the whole argument from O'Neill, MacCabe and other feminists is that we need an open discussion and improved education on these things? In this instance, it doesn't appear to be the case.

sbsquarepants · 27-02-2017 11:54AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I've never found this aspect of it a minefield myself tbh - someone says no, they mean no. The minefield is coming from other sources - the idea that regret after the fact is rape, the idea that drunk sex is rape (in which case I've been raped who knows how many times :pac:), the idea that guys should make the first move but somehow know how the other person is feeling before doing so, etc.

So you've never chanced your arm. She says no, of course you stop, but a few minutes later you try again?

I find it quite hard to believe you haven't at some stage to be honest. I know I certainly have.

Dolbert · 27-02-2017 12:00PM

*Tommy Tiernan voice*

"Did ya ever raaaape someone?"

seamus · 27-02-2017 12:01PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

"Male privilege" means that men are not to be afforded the same rights as women in these scenarios.

The "privilege" word basically is used to try and help people understand that their worldview and their life experience is not necessarily the same one shared by others. In particular where a person has been spared hardship by the circumstances of their birth, they will likely have a limited understanding of the difficulties others face, if they have any understanding at all.

Such as a man not really having to think about his personal safety when walking home at night. A white person not worrying about whether they're going to be abused for the colour of their skin when they go out in public.

It's a legitimate thing and can be a force for good if it makes someone reconsider that they may in fact not have the full picture when it comes to a discussion. Everyone has some level of privilege of their own, it's not just a "white male" thing. Unfortunately it's been hijacked somewhat by people who don't understand this and assume that it only applies to white people or men, or rich people or whatever.
And then you have the lunatics who believe that this "privilege" includes some obligation to pay penance or give up their rights in favour of those without it.

ibarelycare wrote: »

It's such a pity that Feminist has become such an ugly word because of people like Rosemary. I was talking to my bf about this last night...I consider myself a feminist as in I want equal rights for women. In fact I want equal rights for everyone. However it seems like some of the most vocal modern-day feminists are man haters who want men to suffer just because they've had the "privilege" of being born male (and/or white, straight, etc).

I do think it's cyclical. I can recall Germaine Greer and Jo Brand being branded crazy man-hating feminists who wanted to destroy men and put women at the top. Jo Brand's comedy was real marmite at the time, so many people believing it was misandrist and angry comedy.
And plenty of their views at the time probably were. But out of all that kerfuffle and exchange of views came an improvement in equal rights.

So likewise while all this kind of modern anti-man nonsense from RMC can be safely ignored, most likely society will pluck out the nuggets of truth and reason and act on them.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 12:01PM

sashafierce wrote: »

I dispise the term "male privilege" there's privilege to being anything. Small privilege, tall privilege, skinny privilege, multilingual privilege. We all have advantages and disadvantages over each other.

I agree. Health care for one example is swung hugely in the favour of women in this country: women are given free screening for certain cancers, men are not. Also, the court system: the judiciary hand or far tougher sentences to men then they do for women. Also the family courts are heavily weighted in the woman's favour.
Historically, women were oppressed, but most of that oppression has been dismantled by now: apart from the 8th am.

Wibbs · 27-02-2017 12:01PM

timmy880 wrote: »

If that was her objective then fair play but I thought the whole argument from O'Neill, MacCabe and other feminists is that we need an open discussion

That's the thing T, they most certainly don't want an open discussion. They are either afraid of testing the mettle of their politic, or know it doesn't stand up to much scrutiny. Like all zealots they want a discussion where the conclusions are already set in stone. Such individuals prove this time and time and time again. They seek to control the narrative and debate goes out the window. They do this with echo chambers where any dissent is ignored or deleted(if ever invited in the first place) and if one of their narratives escapes into the wild and more open stage, like in this case, they flip out, try to appeal to their acolytes and if they can they attempt to have it shut down.

bodice ripper · 27-02-2017 12:06PM

It all makes me so sad. I remember thinking of myself as a feminist when I was a kid. If I knew then what I know now, I would have thrown myself under a bus.

Crea · 27-02-2017 12:08PM

She stated that she didn't want to have sex but then continued to kiss him so that makes it ok for him to keep pushing for sex?
Maybe she was happy with a bit of snogging and fondling but wanted to draw the line at sex. This is not uncommon and she was not ambiguous in where she wanted the line drawn. He didn't listen.
Is it not ok for a woman to say no to sex but keep kissing? It's not mixed messages. She was clear about stating she didn't want sex but was happy to continue with the make out session.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 12:10PM

bodice ripper wrote: »

It all makes me so sad. I remember thinking of myself as a feminist when I was a kid. If I knew then what I know now, I would have thrown myself under a bus.

Today's feminism isn't feminism. They use the ground earned by feminism and use social disgust to things like violence and rape to push their twisted agendas.

MayoAreMagic · 27-02-2017 12:12PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Because I don't and I never have agreed that not resisting = consent. Consent is active, not passive.

Rejection is not passive either though, and advances, particularly in this scenario, sometimes require rejection. On this occasion the guy misread her intent, probably due to the fact that they had already slept together quite recently, and so she needed to reject his advances more forcefully to indicate to him that she had changed her mind. Otherwise she is basically expecting him to read her mind.

As for her saying no and that being indication enough - saying no while acting like she was interested is giving the guy mixed signals. The fact that they already slept together blurs those signals even more. If she had stopped kissing him, lightly but firmly pushed him off and said listen I don't want to do this, Im not enjoying it and you are kinda making me uncomfortable, then put her clothes back on, I 100% don't believe the guy would have tried to continue. Therefore labelling him a rapist is very harsh.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 12:12PM

Crea wrote: »

She stated that she didn't want to have sex but then continued to kiss him so that makes it ok for him to keep pushing for sex?
Maybe she was happy with a bit of snogging and fondling but wanted to draw the line at sex. This is not uncommon and she was not ambiguous in where she wanted the line drawn. He didn't listen.
Is it not ok for a woman to say no to sex but keep kissing? It's not mixed messages. She was clear about stating she didn't want sex but was happy to continue with the make out session.

She decided it would be easier to have sex than to hurt his feelings. That= consenting to sex.

pilly · 27-02-2017 12:21PM

I thought a lot about this last night because it truly disturbs. I'm trying to see both sides of the debate but it's very hard for a couple of simple reasons:

She agrees that:

1. He definitely didn't think it was rape
2. A court of law wouldn't convict him of rape

And yet she insists it's rape because SHE says so? It's just this attitude of self-obsession that drives me mad.

We can not go down the road of saying that a rape occurred simply because 1 party feels like it did. Life for men would just be unbearable if we did.

sashafierce · 27-02-2017 12:21PM

This post has been deleted.

sbsquarepants · 27-02-2017 12:23PM

Dolbert wrote: »

*Tommy Tiernan voice*

"Did ya ever raaaape someone?"

Depends who you ask - I'd say no.....but I've a feeling Rosemary and her cronies would have me sharing a cell with Larry Murphy:)

Sorry, probably shouldn't be joking. It would be funny if it wasn't so serious!

noaddedsugar · 27-02-2017 12:27PM

sbsquarepants wrote: »

So you've never chanced your arm. She says no, of course you stop, but a few minutes later you try again?

I find it quite hard to believe you haven't at some stage to be honest. I know I certainly have.

I really don't understand why someone would do this. I can honestly say I never have, although I have been with my husband since I was 17 so perhaps that makes my experience on this a little different. Why would you want to have sex with someone who has to be persuaded to have sex with you? Surely you want your partner to be as into it, as into you, as you are them? I would be massively turned off my husband if he behaved like that, lack of self respect and a whack of desperation - bleugh. I'm honestly surprised how normal begging for sex and trying to coerce people into having sex seems to be amongst people here.

If one of us doesn't want to have sex that particular night then there is always tomorrow, if we are too horny to wait then we are more than capable of sorting ourselves out.

Crea · 27-02-2017 12:29PM

Tbh there was wrong behaviour on both sides:

Guys - if a girl states she doesn't want to have sex and says no a number of times you should stop. If you feel you're getting mixed signals then ask. This can be done in a manner that won't break the mood.

Girls - if you don't want to have sex then be very clear. If the guy still pushes then put a stop to everything. If you are afraid of violence or a guy becomessage abusive/foreful/violent then if you can get the hell out of there. Sex in these circumstances is rape.

Giving into sex because you don't want to look mean isn't rape but pressurising someone into sex eventhough they have said no isn't full consent either.

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 12:31PM

I think nearly everyone of my female friends have told me of a similar situation they experienced. That they were drunk, with a guy. The guy makes a move, she says no. He keeps insisting until she "gives in" They didn't want to do it, didn't enjoy it but gave in because it was easier, because they felt intimidated, because they felt pressured, was unsure how he would react, one couldn't even say why.

Most of these girls said no 3 or 4 times but the guy remained insistent. Eventually they gave in. If a girl says no then it means no. It's simple as that. If you find yourself insisting, begging or asking over and over again then realise in this situation you are pressuring the girl into doing something she doesn't want to do. She might "agree" to it in the end but that doesn't all of a sudden make it okay. It doesn't mean you did the right thing. If you do this then you have pressured a girl into having sex who didn't want to have sex with you. That is not the moral, right or good thing to do and you should not come out of it with a clear conscience.

Call it rape, don't call it rape, it's still wrong and the person putting the pressure on is completely at fault in this situation.

sbsquarepants · 27-02-2017 12:35PM

noaddedsugar wrote: »

Surely you want your partner to be as into it, as into you, as you are them? I would be massively turned off my husband if he behaved like that, lack of self respect and a whack of desperation - bleugh. I'm honestly surprised how normal begging for sex and trying to coerce people into having sex seems to be amongst people here.

Of course you do.
I wouldn't go so far as to beg and certainly not to coerce. But it is entirely possible for someone to get turned on and then be into it.
Surely that has happened to either yourself or your husband at some stage. If someone was clearly disinterested, I wouldn't be interested either.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 12:35PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

I think nearly everyone of my female friends have told me of a similar situation they experienced. That they were drunk, with a guy. The guy makes a move, she says no. He keeps insisting until she "gives in" They didn't want to do it, didn't enjoy it but gave in because it was easier, because they felt intimidated, because they felt pressured, was unsure how he would react, one couldn't even say why.

Most of these girls said no 3 or 4 times but the guy remained insistent. Eventually they gave in. If a girl says no then it means no. It's simple as that. If you find yourself insisting, begging or asking over and over again then realise in this situation you are pressuring the girl into doing something she doesn't want to do. She might "agree" to it in the end but that doesn't all of a sudden make it okay. It doesn't mean you did the right thing. If you do this then you have pressured a girl into having sex who didn't want to have sex with you. That is not the moral, right or good thing to do and you should not come out of it with a clear conscience.

Call it rape, don't call it rape, it's still wrong and the person putting the pressure on is completely at fault in this situation.

Presssure and persuasion are not the same thing. I have been persuaded into having sex a few times, I do not see this as me being raped. Me being pressured into having sex= rape. RMC maintains there was no pressure in her situation.

27-02-2017 12:43PM

Yer man sounds like a creep alright. Looking back there were times I said no to girls and would have to leave to get them to stop. And that was when I'd literally be dodging kisses for a while. Any time a girl said "no" to me I left it at that. Even though I had a fair idea they were doing the "hard to get" thing I have no time for silly stuff like that. Found out later it cost me a few good nights and a possible relationship because I was right about them playing "hard to get". Ho hum.

timmy880 · 27-02-2017 12:46PM

This does remind me of a sexual experience of my own and unfortunately I'm putting myself on the line a little bit here but f*ck it, we're having a discussion.

I met a girl online and we agreed to go on a date. In our texts we had discussed sexual things etc. and had been very open with each other. We met one night, had a few drinks, got on great and went back to hers.

On her couch we start kissing and getting naked and handsy with each other. It was all very mills and boons and then she stops and says "no we shouldn't". She said it clearly and I said fine. She continues to kiss me and we get more naked. She says again "no.. we really shouldn't" in a tone that wasn't dismissive but I understood what she said. I say fine fair enough. She kisses me again, we get completely naked and have sex.

This was a few years ago. Now there is nothing at all stopping this female from appearing online, writing a blog and saying "I said no twice but we ended up having sex because I felt sorry for him, now I feel I've been raped" (note: she did not feel sorry for me and we met up several times after this) but technically she could write a blog word for word the same way as Rosemary did and none of it would be factually incorrect (and I therefore would be labelled a rapist by quite a number of Irish females judging by the comments). Her words were understood clearly, nobody was forced into anything but in the end the moment got the better of us and we had sex and it was consentual.

As I said, we met up several times after this and got on great and I know she would never think of me as a rapist but my point is, she could write a blog very similar to this one and it wouldn't be incorrect - the words were said, they were understood but the actions took over on both sides.

The thing is, I can only describe all of the above because I was there. The same way Rosemary can be the only one to accurately describe her encounter. But there are occasions where words are said but actions take over on both sides. And this is where "SHE SAID NO, IT'S OVER" comments just aren't as black and white as that. Hence why I'm posting this story.

27-02-2017 12:47PM

Crea wrote: »

Tbh there was wrong behaviour on both sides:

Guys - if a girl states she doesn't want to have sex and says no a number of times you should stop. If you feel you're getting mixed signals then ask. This can be done in a manner that won't break the mood.

Girls - if you don't want to have sex then be very clear. If the guy still pushes then put a stop to everything. If you are afraid of violence or a guy becomessage abusive/foreful/violent then if you can get the hell out of there. Sex in these circumstances is rape.

Giving into sex because you don't want to look mean isn't rape but pressurising someone into sex eventhough they have said no isn't full consent either.

Breaking my head that we took 100 pages for this sensible breakdown.

This guy wasn't an innocent stooge being led on. He should have stopped pushing when asked, if he wasn't happy with what was explicitly communicated at any stage he should have stopped, and I mean stopped, gotten out of there and gone home if he wasn't able to leave it at that. Let that be your message to your teenage sons if yer so worried about them. Don't push women to go further than they want. If you think that they need chivvying into position then your views are well out of date and you are asking for trouble.

Next- It's abundantly clear that this doesn't wasn't rape and I'd argue against hatrickpatrick and others that it's even sexual assault. She wasn't walking down the street and ok a sudden felt up out of the blue. She was a willing participant in sexual activity and not under any coercion. If she felt uncomfortable at any stage the options to call a halt to all proceedings or to remove herself were there and none of that is in dispute. Anyone still trying to claim that her saying no to each next step but carrying on regardless with the hows-yer-father is arguing a bizarre case.

The whole thing doesn't prove that men are under massive repression in a cruel world run by the feminist agenda. Someone wrote a daft blog. We have no suggestion that the fella in question exists, has been identified, has been subject to any consequence ranging from "jaysus paddy is that you" to lynching. So no need to draw a huge sob story with wide ranging consequences for all on that score.

The majority of women in the thread seem as bemused as the fellas. So let's pull back a bit from the frothing on that score. Gender wars aren't happening in here nor out there, so can we just carry on like normal people please?

The whole thing doesn't prove anything. Except that most people are sensible about this kind of thing. Be more like most people.

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 12:48PM

anna080 wrote: »

Presssure and persuasion are not the same thing. I have been persuaded into having sex a few times, I do not see this as me being raped. Me being pressured into having sex= rape. RMC maintains there was no pressure in her situation.

Once again, I was too ashamed – of my own meanness to say no. I remember thinking, he’ll get the message eventually. We kissed. He tried to undress me. I said no. He tried again – my top came off. I told him I didn’t want to have sex. We kissed some more. He tried to take off my bottoms. I said no.

He wasn’t pushy – at least not physically – but he was stubborn. After several “no”s, I remember thinking, ‘it would just be easier to let him do it.’ So I stopped saying no, and I lay there, and he had sex with me. At no point did I shove him away, or scream at him, or tell him to get out of my room. (I wish I had.) I didn’t behave like a rape victim should behave

Nothing about this is okay. She said no, several times. This is not "persuasion" Persuasion does not involve persisting in taking someones clothes off after they say no. She said in the end she gave in because it was easier. She felt pressured. The guy is completely wrong in the situation.

Winterlong · 27-02-2017 12:51PM

timmy880 wrote: »

This does remind me of a sexual experience of my own and unfortunately I'm putting myself on the line a little bit here but f*ck it, we're having a discussion.

I met a girl online and we agreed to go on a date. In our texts we had discussed sexual things etc. and had been very open with each other. We met one night, had a few drinks, got on great and went back to hers.

On her couch we start kissing and getting naked and handsy with each other. It was all very mills and boons and then she stops and says "no we shouldn't". She said it clearly and I said fine. She continues to kiss me and we get more naked. She says again "no.. we really shouldn't" in a tone that wasn't dismissive but I understood what she said. I say fine fair enough. She kisses me again, we get completely naked and have sex.

This was a few years ago. Now there is nothing at all stopping this female from appearing online, writing a blog and saying "I said no twice but we ended up having sex because I felt sorry for him, now I feel I've been raped" (note: she did not feel sorry for me and we met up several times after this) but technically she could write a blog word for word the same way as Rosemary did and none of it would be factually incorrect (and I therefore would be labelled a rapist by quite a number of Irish females judging by the comments). Her words were understood clearly, nobody was forced into anything but in the end the moment got the better of us and we had sex and it was consentual.

As I said, we met up several times after this and got on great and I know she would never think of me as a rapist but my point is, she could write a blog very similar to this one and it wouldn't be incorrect - the words were said, they were understood but the actions took over on both sides.

The thing is, I can only describe all of the above because I was there. The same way Rosemary can be the only one to accurately describe her encounter. But there are occasions where words are said but actions take over on both sides. And this is where "SHE SAID NO, IT'S OVER" comments just aren't as black and white as that. Hence why I'm posting this story.

And this is a great example of why these are not black and white situations.
There is no standard consent form for having sex. And communication is both verbal and non-verbal.

kunst nugget · 27-02-2017 12:51PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Breaking my head that we took 100 pages for this sensible breakdown.

It's been stated pretty regularly throughout the thread imo.

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 01:06PM

Winterlong wrote: »

And this is a great example of why these are not black and white situations.
There is no standard consent form for having sex. And communication is both verbal and non-verbal.

Thats true, in this situation, her non verbal actions were very clearly saying yes. He also did the right thing by backing off when she said no. This was not the case in Rosemary's article.

Its not that difficult. If the person says no and they seem in anyway reluctant then take no as no. If they say no and they are climbing all over you or rubbing their pleasure bits, its a different situation. If you are in anyway in doubt. Just take no as no.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 01:15PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Nothing about this is okay. She said no, several times. This is not "persuasion" Persuasion does not involve persisting in taking someones clothes off after they say no. She said in the end she gave in because it was easier. She felt pressured. The guy is completely wrong in the situation.

She did not feel pressured or forced, and she has reiterated this several times since, on her Twitter on Facebook, and indeed in the blog.
A lot of victims I've met will often say the same thing: "and before I knew it, or could do anything about it, he was on top of me having sex with me". I totally get that all rape scenarios are different, and you are more likely to be raped in a non aggressive way than an aggressive way, but the common thread is almost always "before I could do anything about it, he was on top of me"..

RMC could have done something about her situation. She just decided she could not be bothered to hurt his feelings and so she consented to sexual engagement when she decided not to hurt him.

meeeeh · 27-02-2017 01:17PM

sashafierce wrote: »

Agree completely and its something I feel sorry for men about and if it was the other way around women would be losing their minds over it. But as I always said women only feel unequal when it suits them to be...

That's ridiculous. Human rights are not tit for tat. It's incredibly offensive to brush the whole gender as feeling unequal only when it suits them. Generalizing things like that doesn't make you more balanced, it makes you just biased against your own gender.

From personal perspective, I didn't grow up in Ireland and there are thing that my mother's generation would take as granted that are still not available to us here or are prohibitively expensive. That doesn't mean there are no major injustices to men (underage sex, unmarried fathers), it just means there are a whole pile of obstacles for women too. And frankly the society would benefit from resolving a of them instead of comparing who is worse of and why.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 01:17PM

LightlyGo wrote: »

What?
So are you saying that women have no responsibility at all for what happens to their body? What sort of message is that? By that logic none of us are safe, we're just sitting ducks waiting for rapists to whisper sweet nothings in our ear because we are incapable of resisting.

That ad you saw was made by someone who needed a dictionary.
Coercion by dictionary and legal definition is the action or practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats...FORCE OR THREAT.
Wearing down resolve is persausion by enticement, an entirely different and entirely legal act. We are on the receiving end of it all day from sales people to tv ads to well meaning mammy's offering us cups of tea. It's completely different. If women are not capable of resisting temptation that's on them.

The idea that are so weak minded that we would need to be protected even from temptation is so insulting to our entire sex is absolutely anthethical of what feminism should be.

Also I'm just going to leave this here, since she summed up the "persuasion/pressure" debacle with more articulation than I ever could.

"Why I did not report my rapist"

Comments