Is rape always rape? Are men always to blame?

starling · 27-05-2013 03:00AM

Norwesterner wrote: »

Whoopi Goldberg, the darling of the Left and feminism reckons there is "rape" and rape rape"
Two different types and two different circumstances.
She believes on the run, convicted paedo Roman Polanski was "not guilty of rape rape".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/sep/29/roman-polanski-whoopi-goldberg

Had Peter Hitchens or Berlusconi made these remarks, there'd have been uproar.

Goldberg was recently honoured in Trinity recently I believe.

Polanski is a scumbag. Goldberg was perpetuating the myth that if the victim is not beaten up then it's not really rape. None of this is new. How is this relevant?

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:02AM

pharmaton wrote: »

Most women do grow up with a fear of walking anywhere alone, especially at night unaccompanied by other women or a man to protect her.
Women are always going to be physically disadvantaged when it comes to strength compared to men, do you believe it should follow then that they should be armed to protect themselves from the insidious nature of the other more stronger gender of the species?

Is that what we really need to learn? Think about it for a minute.

...yes! What, are you saying we shouldn't have to teach people about these harsh facts of life because they're not pleasant? Are you arguing for the right to be blissfully ignorant?

I agree that the world would be a better place if these concerns weren't around. But they are. Let's deal with them and equip people with the necessary knowledge and tools to deal with the reality, instead of pining for an idyllic vision that doesn't exist.

Norwesterner · 27-05-2013 03:05AM

starling wrote: »

Polanski is a scumbag. Goldberg was perpetuating the myth that if the victim is not beaten up then it's not really rape. None of this is new. How is this relevant?

How is it relevent to a thread titled "Is rape always rape"?

starling · 27-05-2013 03:06AM

leggo wrote: »

I'm absolutely not saying that all men should be treated as potential rapists. I also didn't say that she slept alone in the room with him, she just slept in a room with him there.

In the example mentioned, they're going to bed with men. They're putting themselves in a vulnerable position around people they don't know that well.

It's like leaving your door open at night-time. No, it doesn't mean you deserve to have your stuff stolen. But you're simply making a poor judgement call that criminal-minded people could potentially prey upon.

Again, what is wrong with being cautious? Somebody answer me that.

It's not being cautious that's the problem. It's continually advising women "how not to get raped" which implies that the onus is on women to prevent rape, and leads to victim-blaming.

So what if they slept in the same bed with men? I have done so many times at parties and on weekends away etc and never been raped because the men in question weren't rapists.

I don't understand why you are implying that the women who slept in the room were being reckless or risking their personal safety. Statistically and practically speaking they were safer than the woman who wanted to sleep alone in another room with the guy she knew.

Frito · 27-05-2013 03:07AM

So Leggo are you agreeing with pharmaton's postulation that women should be armed at all times to protect themselves from potential rape? Or is that a precaution too far?

pharmaton · 27-05-2013 03:09AM

leggo wrote: »

...yes! What, are you saying we shouldn't have to teach people about these harsh facts of life because they're not pleasant? Are you arguing for the right to be blissfully ignorant?

I agree that the world would be a better place if these concerns weren't around. But they are. Let's deal with them and equip people with the necessary knowledge and tools to deal with the reality, instead of pining for an idyllic vision that doesn't exist.

ok so we admit then that all men are potential rapists and our problems are solved once we prepare for that reality. Thanks for that. (a lot of women already believe this to be the case anyway and as you can see nothing has changed, we just go back to blaming women for not being better protected when it happens)

starling · 27-05-2013 03:10AM

Norwesterner wrote: »

How is it relevent to a thread titled "Is rape always rape"?

The thread is about comments made by Nick Ross about things women should be doing to avoid rape, and a discussion of how the constant advice given to women places the responsibility for not being raped on them, shifting the responsibility away from the actual rapist.
Polanski is not relevant here nor is Whoopi Goldberg's misunderstanding of the definition of rape.

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:12AM

starling wrote: »

It's not being cautious that's the problem. It's continually advising women "how not to get raped" which implies that the onus is on women to prevent rape, and leads to victim-blaming.

So what if they slept in the same bed with men? I have done so many times at parties and on weekends away etc and never been raped because the men in question weren't rapists.

I don't understand why you are implying that the women who slept in the room were being reckless or risking their personal safety. Statistically and practically speaking they were safer than the woman who wanted to sleep alone in another room with the guy she knew.

The post you quoted specifically dealt with the bolded part.

I'm not 'victim-blaming', though. I didn't write the link in the OP. So you can't really blame my argument for other argument's that you've heard.

Instead I've put forward a rational point for urging caution. Not one that will prevent all, or even most, rapes from happening in the future. But one that could prevent some, maybe many.

Do you have kids? If you have a daughter, would you encourage her that it is safe to get drunk and go to bed with men she doesn't know particularly well? I think you're much more likely to find how you really feel about the issue once you answer that question. And you'll also realise that saying, "well I never got raped..." doesn't really cut it either.

Rosy Posy wrote: »

I don't dispute that I will teach my sons and daughter basic street smarts in terms of safety but in the broader context of avoiding crime, not specifically in relation to rape.

However to encourage women to avoid being raped by moderating their dress and behaviour reinforces the idea of rape as being dragged down a lane at knifepoint. This means that when a woman wakes up after a party to find she has been violated as she sleeps, or when a partner or friend persists in having sex after she has said no, she and others are less likely to consider it as rape, which in turn allows these things to continue unpunished and sanctioned in the public consciousness.

You won't find a post in this topic disagreeing with any points you've made there, so I don't know why you're framing it as if I'm disagreeing with you. In fact, you'll find plenty encouraging the continuation of education around what is/isn't consent.

It's not an either/or situation. People are intelligent. We can teach them that as well as the benefits of being cautious.

Norwesterner · 27-05-2013 03:14AM

starling wrote: »

The thread is about comments made by Nick Ross about things women should be doing to avoid rape, and a discussion of how the constant advice given to women places the responsibility for not being raped on them, shifting the responsibility away from the actual rapist.
Polanski is not relevant here nor is Whoopi Goldberg's misunderstanding of the definition of rape.

It's entirely relevent when it's seems his views are shared by others, including a feminist leftie who hosts a women only chat show.
I've heard views similar to Ross many times.
Almost universally by other women.

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:15AM

pharmaton wrote: »

ok so we admit then that all men are potential rapists and our problems are solved once we prepare for that reality. Thanks for that. (a lot of women already believe this to be the case anyway and as you can see nothing has changed, we just go back to blaming women for not being better protected when it happens)

You're determined to put words in my mouth and trot out the old, tired reaction to the problems of either sex, by distracting from it by saying, "WELL WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER SEX."

It's not a relevant point to the discussion we're having. And it's damn near trolling. So don't expect another reply from me unless you plan to have a discussion about the actual point at hand.

Stereomaniac · 27-05-2013 03:18AM

I think, as a man, I am going to hear Whoopi Goldberg's voice on the matter more clearly than I will hear Nick Ross'. I think that the matter of rape should be handled in the same way that you are taught to cross a road as a child, or indeed to not hit pedestrians when learning to drive. The same issue, but two different responsibilities are present within the situation.

pharmaton · 27-05-2013 03:20AM

leggo wrote: »

You're determined to put words in my mouth and trot out the old, tired reaction to the problems of either sex, by distracting from it by saying, "WELL WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER SEX."

It's not a relevant point to the discussion we're having. And it's damn near trolling. So don't expect another reply from me unless you plan to have a discussion about the actual point at hand.

I was raped (sexually and physically assaulted) by someone I lived with. My mother told me I deserved it. I still have no idea why but I think it's because she thought I should be lucky that any man would have me. I can assure you I'm not trolling. I am pretty peed though that anyone would try justify and excuse this kind of behavior though, mostly because he was a man and that's what men do and now you're telling me we should expect it, we should be prepared because, that's the nature of man.

Kirby · 27-05-2013 03:23AM

starling wrote: »

When your car gets stolen the defence counsel doesn't try to imply that it was your fault because you didn't lock your car.

Actually, they do. It's called negligence. Insurance companies can legally deny payouts if its found you contributed to your car getting stolen.

Ofcourse, this has noting to do with rape and I wish people would stop using analogies that involves property and inanimate objects. They have no place in this discussion.

Rosy Posy · 27-05-2013 03:23AM

leggo wrote: »

You won't find a post in this topic disagreeing with any points you've made there, so I don't know why you're framing it as if I'm disagreeing with you. In fact, you'll find plenty encouraging the continuation of education around what is/isn't consent.

It's not an either/or situation. People are intelligent. We can teach them that as well as the benefits of being cautious.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying (and can I say that this thread is a lot more respectful and mature than the last rape thread) but I think that safety education should be given to both sexes in a broader context, not specifically relating to rape.

I think that by framing a discussion on rape with the victims dress or behaviour we perpetuate a false myth around rape and actually make things more difficult for victims. I think that in order to bring the public perception of what a typical rape scenario entails we need to remove elements of dress and behaviour, and include these in a separate non gendered discussion around personal safety.

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:26AM

Look Pharmaton, I'm very sorry to hear that. Genuinely. That's obviously horrible and traumatic and I can't even begin to imagine what you've been through.

However, I'm not arguing what you might believe me to be arguing. If you go back in this topic, you'll see me say many times that this argument doesn't look to blame anyone retrospectively, all I look to do is to urge people to be cautious to prevent this from happening to anyone else in the future. I'm sure, having gone what you've gone through, you can appreciate that standpoint and we can find common ground there at the very least.

I've also said that being cautious won't prevent all, or even most, rapes multiple times. So if you feel that, by me saying that people should be cautious, I'm somehow relaying the blame to rape victims...you've really got me wrong. I understand it's such an emotive subject for you, so how you could see it that way, but that's never been what I've been saying.

pharmaton · 27-05-2013 03:35AM

leggo wrote: »

Look Pharmaton, I'm very sorry to hear that. Genuinely. That's obviously horrible and traumatic and I can't even begin to imagine what you've been through.

However, I'm not arguing what you might believe me to be arguing. If you go back in this topic, you'll see me say many times that this argument doesn't look to blame anyone retrospectively, all I look to do is to urge people to be cautious to prevent this from happening to anyone else in the future. I'm sure, having gone what you've gone through, you can appreciate that standpoint and we can find common ground there at the very least.

I've also said that being cautious won't prevent all, or even most, rapes multiple times. So if you feel that, by me saying that people should be cautious, I'm somehow relaying the blame to rape victims...you've really got me wrong. I understand it's such an emotive subject for you, so how you could see it that way, but that's never been what I've been saying.

I'm sure you already realise that women for the most part are already cautious, they don't walk around alone, especially at night. They don't trust men as wanting to know them for anything other than what's between their legs (you should know this). They have created a giant myth around the nature of the opposite sex in order to protect themselves and it's not working for either gender.
I understand you believe that women shouldn't put themselves in precarious situations but surely that is a given to men and women in the interest of health and safety anyway but your point misses some very important issues.
Most rapes are carried out by people familiar to the victims and apportioning blame to those who have been raped only serves to excuse the actions of the perpetrator. These may not be your intentions but it's the same excuse that's been used for ever already.

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:36AM

Rosy Posy wrote: »

I agree with a lot of what you're saying (and can I say that this thread is a lot more respectful and mature than the last rape thread) but I think that safety education should be given to both sexes in a broader context, not specifically relating to rape.

I think that by framing a discussion on rape with the victims dress or behaviour we perpetuate a false myth around rape and actually make things more difficult for victims. I think that in order to bring the public perception of what a typical rape scenario entails we need to remove elements of dress and behaviour, and include these in a separate non gendered discussion around personal safety.

Look, I would wholeheartedly agree that a lot of people who've argued similar points to mine in the past have been sloppy at best, and dismissive/victim-blaming/sinister at worst. So I do appreciate why people would want that aspect removed from the argument altogether.

However, to gloss over it and treat the issue of caution (or lack thereof) as if it doesn't exist whatsoever is almost going too far in the other direction for me. It'd make the campaign more easily-digestible, yes, but not necessarily better.

What I can agree on is that we need to drop the idea that how a woman dresses leads to her getting raped. I've never made that point, simply because I think it's tripe.

I'd be more inclined to say that decisions she does or doesn't make make her more vulnerable to being attacked. That still very much places the onus on the rapist, but at the same time could open the conversation to educating women on how they can better protect themselves in certain scenarios.

starling · 27-05-2013 03:40AM

leggo wrote: »

The post you quoted specifically dealt with the bolded part.

I'm not 'victim-blaming', though. I didn't write the link in the OP. So you can't really blame my argument for other argument's that you've heard.

You described women who slept in the same bed as men they didn't know as being reckless and not smart. This implies that had they been raped it would be partially their fault for being reckless. That's victim blaming.

leggo wrote: »

And you'll also realise that saying, "well I never got raped..." doesn't really cut it either.

Obviously I'm not saying "I didn't get raped, so you'll be fine!" That's ridiculous. My point is the reason I didn't get raped was because none of the men were rapists. If I had been raped, it would have been because they were rapists, not because I went to sleep in their presence.

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:41AM

pharmaton wrote: »

I'm sure you already realise that women for the most part are already cautious, they don't walk around alone, especially at night. They don't trust men as wanting to know them for anything other than what's between their legs (you should know this). They have created a giant myth around the nature of the opposite sex in order to protect themselves and it's not working for either gender.
I understand you believe that women shouldn't put themselves in precarious situations but surely that is a given to men and women in the interest of health and safety anyway but your point misses some very important issues.
Most rapes are carried out by people familiar to the victims and apportioning blame to those who have been raped only serves to excuse the actions of the perpetrator by shifting the blame.

I do and have given credit earlier in the thread for a lot of women I know who do so. To be honest, when I think of this situation, I think of whatever scenario makes my little sister and my close female friends safer.

What I'm saying is that there are a million scenarios out there that could lead to a potential rape. If we could equip women with the knowledge for how they could better protect themselves in even a few hundred of those situations, they'd be safer, if not still 100% safe. We can never ensure that people are 100% safe. But do I feel that there is still a lot we can do to instill those cautious instincts within women? Definitely.

pharmaton · 27-05-2013 03:46AM

leggo wrote: »

I do and have given credit earlier in the thread for a lot of women I know who do so. To be honest, when I think of this situation, I think of whatever scenario makes my little sister and my close female friends safer.

that's what victim blaming does, it helps people feel safer.

What I'm saying is that there are a million scenarios out there that could lead to a potential rape. If we could equip women with the knowledge for how they could better protect themselves in even a few hundred of those situations, they'd be safer, if not still 100% safe. We can never ensure that people are 100% safe. But do I feel that there is still a lot we can do to instill those cautious instincts within women? Definitely.

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:46AM

starling wrote: »

You described women who slept in the same bed as men they didn't know as being reckless and not smart. This implies that had they been raped it would be partially their fault for being reckless. That's victim blaming.

Obviously I'm not saying "I didn't get raped, so you'll be fine!" That's ridiculous. My point is the reason I didn't get raped was because none of the men were rapists. If I had been raped, it would have been because they were rapists, not because I went to sleep in their presence.

There's a massive difference between urging people to ensure their safety and 'blaming' them when they suffer at the hands of some depraved freak.

You still haven't answered my question, though. You quoted literally everything in my post except for this question:

Do you have kids? If you have a daughter, would you encourage her that it is safe to get drunk and go to bed with men she doesn't know particularly well? I think you're much more likely to find how you really feel about the issue once you answer that question.

Frito · 27-05-2013 03:49AM

Leggo, with respect to precautions, the point being made is that they are arbitrary. In the case of rape, taking precautions will affect my liberty in a way that locking my house or car or whatever won't. You've already said precautions won't prevent most rapes. If I restrict my liberty, I want to be sure that it will prevent me from being raped. But it won't.
The likelihood is that over my lifetime I will not be raped. I can't avoid certain places at certain times because it might stop me from being raped, which as an event is unlikely to happen in the first place.

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:52AM

pharmaton wrote: »

that's what victim blaming does, it helps people feel safer.

I'm sorry pharmaton, but you seem more determined to blame me for victim-blaming instead of addressing my actual points. As much as I'd be interested in doing so, given your perspective, I can't discuss this with you if you won't reply to what I'm saying and just put words in my mouth to suit whatever argument you'd prefer to argue against.

I wish you all the best though. You've clearly been through an ordeal.

leggo · 27-05-2013 03:59AM

Frito wrote: »

Leggo, with respect to precautions, the point being made is that they are arbitrary. In the case of rape, taking precautions will affect my liberty in a way that locking my house or car or whatever won't. You've already said precautions won't prevent most rapes. If I restrict my liberty, I want to be sure that it will prevent me from being raped. But it won't.
The likelihood is that over my lifetime I will not be raped. I can't avoid certain places at certain times because it might stop me from being raped, which as an event is unlikely to happen in the first place.

I hear what you're saying, but as much as we'd like to think otherwise, there is nothing that can prevent a horrible freak occurrence from befalling any of us at any time (house alarms only offer X-amount of protection from burglars and we still must be responsible for putting them on every night etc).

We are never 100% safe, from anything. That's not an adequate argument against being cautious and educating people on how they can better protect themselves in certain scenarios, though.

I'm genuinely intrigued if there's one person out there who'd answer 'Yes' to the below question I've now posted three times, without reply. If your answer is 'No'...then you actually agree with me.

Do you have kids? If you have a daughter, would you encourage her that it is safe to get drunk and go to bed with men she doesn't know particularly well? I think you're much more likely to find how you really feel about the issue once you answer that question. And you'll also realise that saying, "well I never got raped..." doesn't really cut it either.

Frito · 27-05-2013 04:04AM

It's not impractical for me to lock my door at night or when I leave the house. It doesn't restrict my liberty.

It's definitely impractical to have to avoid certain places at certain times, make sure I have a trusted male chaperone (who incidentally presents the biggest risk to me) etc. And all this to maybe improve my chances of not having a very likely thing happen to me.

leggo · 27-05-2013 04:11AM

Ah now...really?

Being careful about where you travel at certain times isn't just a rape issue, it's a safety issue. I'm careful about that, and I'm a security guard who is a former professional wrestler and has basic training in some boxing and MMA. So it's not even a female-specific thing.

Anyway, it's 4am so I'm off to bed. No doubt I'll be back to answer a bunch of other points raised tomorrow.

Frito · 27-05-2013 04:20AM

Really.

The likelihood of me not walking down a certain street is not because I want to avoid being raped. It's unlikely to happen. So it's no use me to avoid a certain activity for a relatively small risk.
If by general safety you mean getting mugged, then yes, that is much more likely to happen to me and I would probably modify my behaviour accordingly.

Gin77 · 27-05-2013 07:42AM

Smidge wrote: »

I think any person who falsely, knowingly alleges rape should face the same penalties as a person convicted of rape.

But where a woman is genuinely raped while both drunk, the onus imo is still on the man to exercise exact caution.

Cos that would really encourage them yo come clean in the end!

Dave! · 27-05-2013 08:17AM

I'm not saying power, but... power

SB2013 · 27-05-2013 08:35AM

Seanafitz wrote: »

So should we cover up and not wer a dress or skirts ? Should we muslimise our country and be uptight just to protect women from rape ? Or to protect rapists from being exposed ?

Because in my opinion nothing gives any other human being the right to have any type of sexual interactions with you without your permission ... I couldn care if you walk around with a sign on your neck saying I like to have sex ... That's not a reasonable excuse for a person to be raped !

Please point out where I mentioned clothing or protecting rapists from being exposed. You're just looking for a reason to be offended. I'm talking about taking precautions to reduce the chances of you becoming a victim. Don't travel alone at night,. Don't drink yourself into a state where you don't have your wits about you. Don't advertise your plans for people to hear. The same advice would go to people who don't want to get mugged as well by the way.

Someone said the rape would happen anyway, just to someone else and taking precautions would just move the rape to another victim. Most rapes are opportunistic. If the opportunity is greatly reduced the chances of it happening go down. Same can be said for most serious crimes in general. Do you leave your car running in the morning to heat up? Do you tell your kid not to talk to strangers? Do you lock your door at night? Would you wander down Dunsink Lane while walking your dog? No. Why? To reduce the chances of you becoming the victim of a crime.

You can call it victim blaming all you want, I call it protecting potential victims. In no way does it reduce the blame on a rapist if they do strike. If you have a daughter will you tell her about the dangers out there and try to protect her? Damn right you will. Does that mean you will blame her if she happens to get attacked?

Is rape always rape? Are men always to blame?

Comments