"Why I did not report my rapist"

kunst nugget · 27-02-2017 01:17PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

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.

How do we know that the person accused of rape in the original article didn't act as Timmy880 did?

Mountainsandh · 27-02-2017 01:19PM

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.

Your stance makes a lot more sense now, with a bit of context hatrickpatrick.
Tbh by my standards you seem very "liberated" in that department. I'm not a talker and neither is Mr M, and I've only ever once met a talker in bed in my youth, and I didn't like it

So the idea to stop and say something out loud when things are getting heated up is really not something I would be keen on. I'd much rather the man read my body language, and if there was a problem, then I'd talk (if needed). Talking to give positive reinforcement, whether it's him or me, would feel a bit odd, I'm not saying, it could happen the odd time, but it would probably slot in more into a game mode.

Maybe this is something you're not familiar with, since I would guess that the cohort for BDSM need to communicate more ?

Haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but I bet there's many more non-talkers out there, who really would dislike the idea of spelling their consent out before carrying on.

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 01:22PM

anna080 wrote: »

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 so 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.

But she did do something.. She said no several times. The guy still insisted. What more does she have to do? Nothing from what she wrote suggests that her actions would leave him to believe she wanted it. Though I'm aware there is probably two sides of this story, based on this article alone...she said no several times, he kept going. He was in the wrong here.

She should not be blamed because she was forceful enough. Her no should have been enough for him to step back at the very least and reconsider the situation.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 01:25PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

But she did do something.. She said no several times. The guy still insisted. What more does she have to do? Nothing from what she wrote suggests that her actions would leave him to believe she wanted it. Though I'm aware there is probably two sides of this story, based on this article alone...she said no several times, he kept going. He was in the wrong here.

She should not be blamed because she was forceful enough. Her no should have been enough for him to step back at the very least and reconsider the situation.

Please tell me how "he insisted"..

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 01:27PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

How do we know that the person accused of rape in the original article didn't act as Timmy880 did?

Look, I understand there might be two sides to this story. Though I don't believe most women don't cry rape for no reason. But what I'm talking about is if any man or woman finds themselves in a situation where someone is saying no to their sexual advances, its not difficult to figure out what they really mean.

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 01:32PM

anna080 wrote: »

Please tell me how "he insisted"..

typo, I mean persisted

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 01:37PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

typo, I mean persisted

She persisted also.

kunst nugget · 27-02-2017 01:39PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Look, I understand there might be two sides to this story. Though I don't believe most women don't cry rape for no reason.

This really seems a case of looking back at a sexual encounter with regret and then loading the actions of each participant with extra weight until it becomes a rape.

WoolyJumper wrote: »

But what I'm talking about is if any man or woman finds themselves in a situation where someone is saying no to their sexual advances, its not difficult to figure out what they really mean.

If you're getting incredibly mixed signals then it is.

He followed me into my room and asked if he could kiss me. I was in my pyjamas.

Once again, I was too ashamed – of my own meanness to say no. I remember thinking, he’ll get the message eventually. We kissed.

How is a person suppose to get the message that you don't fancy them if you're kissing them?

They kiss, she says no. They continue to kiss, she says no. They continue to kiss… At any point she could have called a halt to proceedings and as she said herself, he wasn't physical at any point and there was a house full of people.

sbsquarepants · 27-02-2017 01:41PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Eventually they gave in.
Call it rape, don't call it rape, .

Don't.
Simple as that.

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Nothing from what she wrote suggests that her actions would leave him to believe she wanted it. .

Apart from her actions that is!

By her own admission, she went along with it rather than have an awkward conversation.
Without being too graphic, what does "went along with it" mean did she lie there like a corpse or actively join in? It's too damn late a decade after putting on a show to decide you didn't really mean it!
This whole story strikes me as nothing more than attention seeking drama queenery. And what's more it's highly dismissive off and offensive to anyone who's ever had the misfortune to actually be raped.
She should be ashamed of herself!

MayoAreMagic · 27-02-2017 01:48PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Look, I understand there might be two sides to this story. Though I don't believe most women don't cry rape for no reason. But what I'm talking about is if any man or woman finds themselves in a situation where someone is saying no to their sexual advances, its not difficult to figure out what they really mean.

Yes they don't, but this one seems to. Or at least she is confusing her regretting the act of her deciding she would rather sleep with the guy than just reject him, with being raped. They are absolutely two different things. She made that choice herself, yet she wants to blame the repercussions on someone else.
The root of this, for me, is a victim mentality as default, whenever you feel bad about or regret something. What would her reaction be if the guy involved happened to get named, suffer terrible abuse and were to commit suicide because of it?

At the end of the day, she accepts that a court would not rule this as rape, she accepts that the guy would not think that he had raped someone. So basically, she is redefining what a rape is to suit herself. I find that kinda disrespectful to people who actually have had to suffer being raped in line with the proper definition of the term.

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 01:48PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

This really seems a case of looking back at a sexual encounter with regret and then loading the actions of each participant with extra weight until it becomes a rape.

If you're getting incredibly mixed signals then it is.

How is a person suppose to get the message that you don't fancy them if you're kissing them?

They kiss, she says no. They continue to kiss, she says no. They continue to kiss… At any point she could have called a halt to proceedings and as she said herself, he wasn't physical at any point and there was a house full of people.

It's not difficult. If there is any doubt you step back and reassess the situation. Ask them whats going on. They kiss, she says no...He step's back and says okay, you want to stop?

Also she did call a halt to the proceedings....She said no, several times. He ignored it and continued

ibarelycare · 27-02-2017 01:49PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

It's not difficult. If there is any doubt you step back and reassess the situation. Ask them whats going on. They kiss, she says no...He step's back and says okay, you want to stop?

I think most people here are in agreement that he should have done that. But not doing it doesn't make him a rapist.

midlandsmissus · 27-02-2017 01:58PM

anna080 wrote: »

sadie06 wrote: »

Reading this thread the main thing I feel is huge worry for my 13 year old son as he tries to navigate this minefield in a few years time. The burden on young men is immense as far as I can see.

It's really worrying, and as you say, the burden is completely on the male: "do I stop this make out session and ask if sex is going ahead even though it would seem like it is, or do I ruin the moment and make her say out loud "yes I am consenting" will I make her sign something? or do I just feed or her body language, what if she regrets it in the morning and tells people I raped her?.." People have been having implied consensual sex for thousands of years and now because a few perpetual victims are crying rape people think it's wrong.

Why not just ask them if they want to have sex?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 27-02-2017 02:02PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Why not just ask them if they want to have sex?

It's very hard to have a conversation or discussion with you when you refuse to address posts already trying to enter into a discussion with you, instead choosing to post the same hysterical posts over and over.

kunst nugget · 27-02-2017 02:08PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Also she did call a halt to the proceedings....She said no, several times. He ignored it and continued

In Timmy880's story, she said no several times but her actions were giving a different signal. Do you think he is a rapist as well based on what he did? I certainly don't.

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 02:09PM

ibarelycare wrote: »

I think most people here are in agreement that he should have done that. But not doing it doesn't make him a rapist.

Yeah like I said in a previous post, call it rape, don't call it rape...either way what he did was wrong.

I'm not going to blame this woman for not saying no forcefully enough. Just as I would never blame my friends who found themselves in similar situations.

MayoAreMagic · 27-02-2017 02:12PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Why not just ask them if they want to have sex?

Because most people dont want to take part in a running co-commentary throughout each stage of the act...

Look, at the end of the day, the old addage of actions speaking louder than words has a place here. Rolling around in various stages of undress in a bedroom away from everyone else, kinda trumps intermittently stating the word no between bouts of kissing. If she didn't have feelings for the guy, how did he even get in the door? The nore you think about this article, the more annoying it becomes.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 02:16PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Yeah like I said in a previous post, call it rape, don't call it rape...either way what he did was wrong.

I'm not going to blame this woman for not saying no forcefully enough. Just as I would never blame my friends who found themselves in similar situations.

Nobody is blaming her. Rather, people are saying she is just as much responsible for this situation as he is.

SpillingTheTea · 27-02-2017 02:21PM

Tbh, as a woman I am naturally a 'feminist' as in I believe women and men should be equal (though I've come to realise that I'm probably more egalitarian tbh) but I am sick to my teeth of this whole notion that we should be 'teaching men/ young boys how to treat women'.

How about we teach both women and men how they properly communicate? I mean rape does happen. It's horrific. I've been in a few situations that could be construed as 'rape' based on what RMC is considering rape as.

But the issue in this situation is the lack of proper communication. She just wasn't into him, but never actually verbalised that fact.

Put yourself in the guys shoes for a second. RMC and himself had consensual sex the weekend previous. She wasn't that into him still at that point but it happened anyway. The following weekend, they went out in a group and he ended up back in her house along with others.
We do not know if they had been flirting. She decided to go to bed because she was drunk. It can be assumed that they all were drunk. He could have assumed this was an invitation. She did say no and I'm not denying that, but the complete crux of the issue to me is the fact that her mouth said no, but her actions said yes. She never once pushed the issue further. She even said she'd rather 'let him have sex with her' in order to avoid having an 'awkward conversation'.

Look, the events that occurred were not ideal. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and say that she's affected by it because of retrospective thinking, but that doesn't mean that the full blame and onus is on the guy here.
She had the perfect opportunity to communicate 'no' in a much better and effective way but she CHOSE not to. How is that this guys fault 100%?

Outlaw Pete · 27-02-2017 02:24PM

Penny Tration wrote: »

Men aren't the only ones capable of sexual assault.

Aye, but RmacC sees the two as being totally different and not just the type of assault were a woman is isolated (which I think most people understand is more worrisome for women) but also assaults which take place in crowded bars, work places etc, were isolation is not a factor. Specifically the Q Bar in Rmac's case, where she says she was groped and when two men shared their similar experiences in bars, Rmac mocked them:

https://twitter.com/rosemarymaccabe/status/740183666597466112

https://twitter.com/Max_The_Serpent/status/740249229528948736

The saying 'Misery loves company but hates competition' is never more apt than with dealing with these people. They claim they want equality but yet try and discuss almost any topic they raise from an all inclusive perspective, with regards to gender, and they won't have a bar of it. But I guess when you are convinced that men are a privileged class, and woman in western society are an oppressed second class, then it's going to anger you when you hear them complain about things they deal with. The following kind of nonsense shows how out of touch she is:

https://twitter.com/RosemaryMacCabe/status/741148892968914944

Eh, me for one, Rosemary.

Men are far more likely (particularly young men) to attack other men. This kind of thing for example is all too common these days. Whenever I am walking through back streets in Dublin the past couple of years the actions of this chap come to mind and so of course I have been fearful walking home alone. In fact I would say most guys will have experiences where they have had to pass a group of lads in the small hours (in an isolated area perhaps) and I doubt many of them haven't felt at least somewhat apprehensive about doing so, and pondered the chances that there might be some sort of confrontation about to take place and given some thought to maybe how the should react if it does. Lost count of how many times I have changed route on seeing a gang of lads in the distance. For me it's almost automatic at this stage given that I have had numerous encounters with such idiots over the years.

So anyway, I find it damn foolish that anyone would think that women are the only ones who fear walking alone after dark.

Mountainsandh · 27-02-2017 02:29PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Yeah like I said in a previous post, call it rape, don't call it rape...either way what he did was wrong.

I'm not going to blame this woman for not saying no forcefully enough. Just as I would never blame my friends who found themselves in similar situations.

If you read a little more of the thread what you will find is that people are not saying that the guy is white as snow in her story.

Thing is though, she also had a responsibility to ensure that he got the message. Communication is 2 ways.

So while he should have asked for clarification if he wasn't sure, she should have offered clarification if something bothered her (such as, him not stopping).

It's not all up to the other person to make things right.

I'm going to repeat myself here, but I used the analogy of a hairdresser on this thread and I think it fits well, as they do something to your body that you may or may not like. I know analogies are dangerous grounds to be stepping in, they lend themselves well to dramatic outrage to be comparing a serious situation with a lighter situation, but they really help comprehension imo.

Pretend you go to the hairdresser, and you ask for a particular haircut. The hairdresser starts working, but you get alarmed, and you don't like what he's doing. You say no, stop, no, but the man is concentrating and he doesn't hear you, or he's foreign and he didn't understand, or he's just stubborn and it doesn't occur to him you might be unhappy, so he continues.

Do you sit there, frustrated that he didn't respond to your request to stop, and wait until it's over, then complain that he went against your wishes ?

Would you let him give you the worst haircut, because he just didn't hear/want to hear you when you said no, no, no ?

It's clear that the hairdresser should really have listened, and stopped.

But it's your body, and it's also your responsibility to make your message unequivocal if that's what it takes to make it stop.

You can't spend a life letting things happen, and then blame others for it.
It happens a lot nowadays, it seems to be endemic with a generation of people, and it's wrong.

RMC's account illustrates that imo.

Jthreehats · 27-02-2017 02:31PM

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).

And another line that a lot of these feminists spout is that women should support each other, seemingly no matter what the subject matter is. I'll support anyone who I agree with, regardless of their gender, race, sexual orientation. The fact that Rosemary is deleting comments on FB from FEMALES who disagree with her (but not men) backs up this silly idea.

Modern day feminists (SJWs I guess) are undoing the good work that the Suffragates did for women, and it hugely bothers me that they have adopted the term and turned it into something so negative.

I totally agree with this post, some causes rosemary supports are very important to me, but her behaviour regarding the questioning of her article, and the article itself of course, just contributes to the negative view of women's rights and those who stand for them. for example I wouldn't wear a 'repeal the 8th' jumper, as it has now been associated with people like her. She's not a feminist. She is actively silencing women.

WoolyJumper · 27-02-2017 02:37PM

anna080 wrote: »

Nobody is blaming her. Rather, people are saying she is just as much responsible for this situation as he is.

And I completely disagree. She said no, she shouldn't have to do more than that

Mountainsandh · 27-02-2017 02:37PM

Jthreehats wrote: »

She's not a feminist. She is actively silencing women.

+1
I'd hate to be associated with these factions, and as a result I am less likely to participate in demonstrations or discussions where they might be construed to represent me.

westernlass · 27-02-2017 02:39PM

James Kavanagh left this very valid comment on Rosemary's blog about Conor McGregor. I admire what he says and find I agree 100%.

“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
Your post contained no ideas, just tenuous inferences from quotes which do refer to a sport in which unshakeable confidence and a domination mindset are assets.
But note that you’ve done something much worse than reduce a person to an object. You’ve reduced him to a parody of his gender. Deliberately taking quotes that refer to combat sports and imposing them into a conversation about the treatment of women. You’ve imposed your own domination mindset, using terminology like “rape culture” and “rape” where they don’t belong, hoping to recruit our social disdain for these ideas (a disdain that wouldn’t exist if our culture really did venerate rape) to your ad hoc interpretations of this guy’s words.
Conor uses the threat of physical violence to dominate. You use the threat of social outrage. But you are trying, JUST as hard to dominate, but while Connor is dominating in consensual competition, you’re doing it to harm him, intentionally, by attempting to soil his reputation by associating him with rape.
This is not feminism. This is using the ground earned by feminism, and the social abhorrence of things like rape and violence against women, to bully people and advance your own journalistic career. You aught to think very deeply about the harm you do to equality with these things. Your ideas are a product of social progress, not a cause of them. If you want to exaggerate the problem for your own narrow self interest, just know that you’re impelling young, impressionable women towards a hysterical fear of men and how they’ll be treated.
By telling women society hates them, you stunt their potential. You lower their expectations. They stay out of male dominated fields, even though almost every male I know would love to work around more women. You do this in the interest only of exaggerating the problem, and barely mentioning a solution. Please, please, consider being a voice of inspiration and reason, and stop with the narrow, utterly baseless, identity politics.

There is an irony that she posted a photo of them being best friends last night on social media.

retro:electro · 27-02-2017 02:42PM

westernlass wrote: »

James Kavanagh left this very valid comment on Rosemary's blog about Conor McGregor. I admire what he says and find I agree 100%.

“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
Your post contained no ideas, just tenuous inferences from quotes which do refer to a sport in which unshakeable confidence and a domination mindset are assets.
But note that you’ve done something much worse than reduce a person to an object. You’ve reduced him to a parody of his gender. Deliberately taking quotes that refer to combat sports and imposing them into a conversation about the treatment of women. You’ve imposed your own domination mindset, using terminology like “rape culture” and “rape” where they don’t belong, hoping to recruit our social disdain for these ideas (a disdain that wouldn’t exist if our culture really did venerate rape) to your ad hoc interpretations of this guy’s words.
Conor uses the threat of physical violence to dominate. You use the threat of social outrage. But you are trying, JUST as hard to dominate, but while Connor is dominating in consensual competition, you’re doing it to harm him, intentionally, by attempting to soil his reputation by associating him with rape.
This is not feminism. This is using the ground earned by feminism, and the social abhorrence of things like rape and violence against women, to bully people and advance your own journalistic career. You aught to think very deeply about the harm you do to equality with these things. Your ideas are a product of social progress, not a cause of them. If you want to exaggerate the problem for your own narrow self interest, just know that you’re impelling young, impressionable women towards a hysterical fear of men and how they’ll be treated.
By telling women society hates them, you stunt their potential. You lower their expectations. They stay out of male dominated fields, even though almost every male I know would love to work around more women. You do this in the interest only of exaggerating the problem, and barely mentioning a solution. Please, please, consider being a voice of inspiration and reason, and stop with the narrow, utterly baseless, identity politics.

There is an irony that she posted a photo of them being best friends last night on social media.

It's an amazing post, but are you sure it's from the actual social influencer JK? It could be anyone just using that name

neonsofa · 27-02-2017 02:43PM

westernlass wrote: »

James Kavanagh left this very valid comment on Rosemary's blog about Conor McGregor. I admire what he says and find I agree 100%.

“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
Your post contained no ideas, just tenuous inferences from quotes which do refer to a sport in which unshakeable confidence and a domination mindset are assets.
But note that you’ve done something much worse than reduce a person to an object. You’ve reduced him to a parody of his gender. Deliberately taking quotes that refer to combat sports and imposing them into a conversation about the treatment of women. You’ve imposed your own domination mindset, using terminology like “rape culture” and “rape” where they don’t belong, hoping to recruit our social disdain for these ideas (a disdain that wouldn’t exist if our culture really did venerate rape) to your ad hoc interpretations of this guy’s words.
Conor uses the threat of physical violence to dominate. You use the threat of social outrage. But you are trying, JUST as hard to dominate, but while Connor is dominating in consensual competition, you’re doing it to harm him, intentionally, by attempting to soil his reputation by associating him with rape.
This is not feminism. This is using the ground earned by feminism, and the social abhorrence of things like rape and violence against women, to bully people and advance your own journalistic career. You aught to think very deeply about the harm you do to equality with these things. Your ideas are a product of social progress, not a cause of them. If you want to exaggerate the problem for your own narrow self interest, just know that you’re impelling young, impressionable women towards a hysterical fear of men and how they’ll be treated.
By telling women society hates them, you stunt their potential. You lower their expectations. They stay out of male dominated fields, even though almost every male I know would love to work around more women. You do this in the interest only of exaggerating the problem, and barely mentioning a solution. Please, please, consider being a voice of inspiration and reason, and stop with the narrow, utterly baseless, identity politics.

There is an irony that she posted a photo of them being best friends last night on social media.

Wow, I often find myself stuck for words and then appreciate when someone else is able to articulate how I feel, but in this case I am almost jealous at how well he made his point. Fair play to him.

givyjoe · 27-02-2017 02:47PM

anna080 wrote: »

It's an amazing post, but are you sure it's from the actual social influencer JK? It could be anyone just using that name

Does it really matter who the words came from?

Maguined · 27-02-2017 02:48PM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

And I completely disagree. She said no, she shouldn't have to do more than that

I gave into sex before to avoid an awkward conversation on rejection. It was a relationship where we were living together but it was extremely rocky and this occured shortly before we broke up. She had been out to a party at her friends house that I did not attend as I had work the next day with an important project. When she came home and got into bed she wanted to have sex. I said I did not want to and she proceeded to start initiating. I was not in the mood, it was late and I had work tomorrow while she did not and I was unhappy in the relationship so I did not want to have sex but after I said no and explained why several times and she continued to pester I did the same and felt it would be easier to just get it over with rather than physically stop her and endure the resulting several hour long fight and get no sleep before work.

I do not feel like a rape victim but by your definition do you believe I was raped because I said no and she persisted? Would you be okay with this ex of mine going to prison or being publically labelled a rapist even though by my own admission I gave into having sex despite saying no several times?

timmy880 · 27-02-2017 02:51PM

Rosemary Mac CabeVerified account‏@RosemaryMacCabe Feb 25
FWIW: I don't hate him. Like I said, I don't think he's some monster whose plan was to rape someone. I think we're all f*cked up re consent.

"I think we're all f*cked up re consent"...........

This lady can't decide what consent is and has admitted so.

Isn't that...? You know.... A concern???? For somebody writing a blog about rape???

"Why I did not report my rapist"

Comments