Is rape always rape? Are men always to blame?

Galwayguy35 · 28-05-2013 02:28PM

wonderfulname wrote: »

I really don't get this focus on false allegations, it's disingenuous and all but statistically insignificant.

The Guardian, relating to the Crown Prosicution Service across the water;

5,651 prosecutions for rape, 35 for false allegations (am I crazy or is that 0.6%?), in a country where 54,000 incidents of sexual assault are reported to police every year, and an estimated 473,000 take place every year.

But wait, there's more; When you look into it, malicious intent doesn't factor in a large percentage of that teeny tiny percentage of rape allegations which prove false, and mental heath issues cover a large % of the remainder.

Why the **** do people talk about this as though it matters? It's incredibly harmful to rape victims, insulting to women in general and just plain stupid if I'm completely honest.

Full Report (Which, by the way, was comissioned after a woman was falsely convicted for falsely accusing a man of rape, we could go around in circles with this)

Well I imagine it would matter to you if you were accused in the wrong, and other men have a low tolerence for rapists and those accused of it so there is a good chance if you of I were accused of it we could be drinking through a straw for the rest of our lives.

wonderfulname · 28-05-2013 02:33PM

silentrust wrote: »

It's been nice to have a discussion that's not too sharply divided along gender lines. It seems most women are getting as fed up as I am with the Feminist movement which ironically is one of the main things standing in their way of achieving full equality and recognition within society.

feminism

noun
[mass noun]
the advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.

I don't know what your definition of feminism is but individual bloggers or groups which you disagree with are not representative of feminism as a whole, it's like judging Christianity based on interactions with the WBC or, equally, Quakers.

Lyaiera · 28-05-2013 02:42PM

silentrust wrote: »

It's been nice to have a discussion that's not too sharply divided along gender lines. It seems most women are getting as fed up as I am with the Feminist movement which ironically is one of the main things standing in their way of achieving full equality and recognition within society.

I agree with you that it's nice to not see things divided along gender lines. I disagree with you on the feminism aspect. I think most people here bar a vocal few see the importance of challenging rape culture and misogyny through feminism no matter what terms are used to describe it.

dr.bollocko · 28-05-2013 02:43PM

MOD:

Just re-reading over this trainwreck now.

We'll be closing this shortly so please get in any final arguments.

silentrust banned btw. For a start.

Anyone unsure as to why please see Rosy Posy's useful breakdown above.

--Kaiser-- · 28-05-2013 02:45PM

Lyaiera wrote: »

I agree with you that it's nice to not see things divided along gender lines. I disagree with you on the feminism aspect. I think most people here bar a vocal few see the importance of challenging rape culture and misogyny through feminism no matter what terms are used to describe it.

There we go again with that ****ing phrase

kylith · 28-05-2013 02:51PM

silentrust wrote: »

... I rest my case. :-)

You see, this is why it's so hard to have a sensible discussion about this. Of course I ridicule someone who says that telling a joke about rape is supporting "rape culture".

It's not the same thing as supporting rape. If there is humour in these kind of jokes it's because they are unrealistic. The nature of humour is diverting your expectations one way and then another.

As for hating women have you read any of my other posts? Do I mention hatred anywhere? I have a deep suspicion of people who try to blur the issue by saying things which aren't rape in fact are, that's true but I'd say the same to a man.

I was once telling some 'hilarious' dead baby jokes when my friend burst into tears. It turned out that she had had a miscarriage a few months earlier, a fact which she didn't share until my funny jokes brought it to a head.

It's the same with rape jokes; if you are 100% sure that everyone in earshot thinks their funny, hasn't been raped or sexually assaulted, and doesn't know anyone who has been raped or sexually assaulted (bearing in mind that this is often not something that people will share with those around them), then go ahead and tell your joke. If, on the other hand, you're not 100% sure of the above then you need to bear in mind that there's a possibility that you could well be dredging up some very unpleasant memories for someone.

It's not that they desensitise to rape, or that they encourage rape culture, it's that you don't know who has or has not been sexually assaulted and to them those jokes are anything but funny.

hatrickpatrick · 28-05-2013 02:52PM

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Yes. The definition of rape is a male engaging in non consensual sexual intercourse with a female. A woman cannot be guilty of rape.

The legal definition of rape is actually about "penetration", not sex. So in fact under the law, you're right. And that's something I find absolutely f*cking sick.

hatrickpatrick · 28-05-2013 02:56PM

Rosy Posy wrote: »

You admit to trolling a site which exists to empower women.

It does not exist to empower anyone. It exists to make mountains out of molehills. And to campaign for restrictions on freedom of speech because it doesn't like what some people are saying.

starling · 28-05-2013 03:04PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

No it isn't. If it was, we wouldn't be allowed to laugh at Tommy Tiernan. Or at Monty Python, because their religious satire is part of a wider culture of discriminating against religious people. Or at the IT Crowd, because it's part of a wider culture of discriminating against geeky types. Etc etc etc.

Maybe you think racist jokes are just fine, I'm not getting into that.
Religious satire and jokes about geekery are not racism, don't try to claim they are the same thing, that's ridiculous. Satire against powerful groups like the church is not the same as making jokes about oppressed groups like POC. Geek are not a race.

Cody Pomeray · 28-05-2013 03:05PM

Rosy Posy wrote: »

You also seem to have little understanding of what rape culture actually is. In a society that trivialises rape...

Ironically enough, the people most at risk of trivializing rape are people who construct all sorts of fanciful parallels with personal discomfort in bars and nightclubs, or crazy feminists who publish "you are a rape supporter if..." blog posts.

If anything, people who insist that rape allegations must be taken very seriously, who insist that rape is not a term to be bandied about loosely, and who insist that false allegations of rape must be punished with severity are the same people who seem to best understand the seriousness of rape, and who are most opposed to its trivialisation.

--Kaiser-- · 28-05-2013 03:06PM

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Ironically enough, the people most at risk of trivializing rape are people who construct all sorts of fanciful parallels with personal discomfort in bars and nightclubs, or crazy feminists who publish "you are a rape supporter if..." blog posts.

If anything, people who insist that rape allegations must be taken very seriously, who insist that rape is not a term to be bandied about loosely, and who insist that false allegations of rape must be punished with severity are the same people who seem to best understand the seriousness of rape, and who are most opposed to its trivialisation.

Could not have put this better myself

hatrickpatrick · 28-05-2013 03:07PM

starling wrote: »

Maybe you think racist jokes are just fine, I'm not getting into that.
Religious satire and jokes about geekery are not racism, don't try to claim they are the same thing, that's ridiculous. Satire against powerful groups like the church is not the same as making jokes about oppressed groups like POC. Geek are not a race.

Who cares? Satire is satire, who it's satirising is completely irrelevant. Either we have freedom of speech or we don't.

hatrickpatrick · 28-05-2013 03:08PM

dr.bollocko wrote: »

MOD:

Just re-reading over this trainwreck now.

We'll be closing this shortly so please get in any final arguments.

silentrust banned btw. For a start.

Anyone unsure as to why please see Rosy Posy's useful breakdown above.

Why not just ban the people who are breaking the rules and let the debate continue? Just because it's controversial doesn't mean it can't be discussed?

kat.mac · 28-05-2013 03:11PM

leggo wrote: »

At one stage, a guy I know spoke of how one girl would only stay in a room with him in it because she didn't want to be drunk and alone with the other guys, simply because she just didn't know them. She didn't suspect them or anything, just didn't want to be vulnerable around them before building up a certain level of trust. Other girls on the trip didn't. Nothing happened, but the former was a case of being smart and taking precautions (i.e. making a conscious decision to stay with someone she knew well and trusted). With this very discussion in mind, upon hearing the story I could only think that the latter girls were slightly reckless.

That doesn't mean that anyone is 'asking for it' or 'deserves it'. Just people being smart and not being smart and the little decisions that, should they be unfortunate enough to encounter someone sick enough to do this, could either unwittingly save them or lead to serious consequences.

That's my point. And it's worth understanding and noting in these conversations without people applying false pretenses to it.

You are deeply insulting both men and women here.

You're saying that these girls should have assumed they were in danger just by being in the presence of some men.

You're also saying that you would be attributing at least some of the blame to the victim if something bad had happened one of the girls you've just labelled as 'reckless.'

This thinking needs to end.

B0jangles · 28-05-2013 03:12PM

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Ironically enough, the people most at risk of trivializing rape are people who construct all sorts of fanciful parallels with personal discomfort in bars and nightclubs, or crazy feminists who publish "you are a rape supporter if..." blog posts.

If anything, people who insist that rape allegations must be taken very seriously, who insist that rape is not a term to be bandied about loosely, and who insist that false allegations of rape must be punished with severity are the same people who seem to best understand the seriousness of rape, and who are most opposed to its trivialisation.

And it's just a coincidence that the posters keenest to restrict the discussion to the severest kinds of sexual assault while dismissing the milder kind are apparently all men who just know better than the women these things are happening to.

And I know you are gay, I've noticed over the years that gay men are among the quickest to dismiss the experiences of women.

--Kaiser-- · 28-05-2013 03:14PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why not just ban the people who are breaking the rules and let the debate continue? Just because it's controversial doesn't mean it can't be discussed?

These threads never really go anywhere and usually dissolve into hysteria and vitriol. To be honest it should have been closed when there were about 200 posts about hugging

hatrickpatrick · 28-05-2013 03:15PM

B0jangles wrote: »

And it's just a coincidence that the posters keenest to restrict the discussion to the severest kinds of sexual assault while dismissing the milder kind are apparently all men who just know better than the women these things are happening to.

And I know you are gay, I've noticed over the years that gay men are among the quickest to dismiss the experiences of women.

No one is dismissing the milder kind. They're pointing out that it is in fact milder and not the same thing. And not indicative of a conspiracy.

kunst nugget · 28-05-2013 03:16PM

B0jangles wrote: »

And I know you are gay, I've noticed over the years that gay men are among the quickest to dismiss the experiences of women.

Amazingly all gay people don't act the same way, just like all men don't and all women don't. What good are sweeping statements like that?

hatrickpatrick · 28-05-2013 03:16PM

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

These threads never really go anywhere and usually dissolve into hysteria and vitriol. To be honest it should have been closed when there were about 200 posts about hugging

Why's that?

If people dissolve into rule breaking infract or ban them, what's the harm in having a discussion regardless of whether it generates controversy? A Boards thread never killed anyone or led to a volcanic eruption...?

B0jangles · 28-05-2013 03:17PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

No one is dismissing the milder kind. They're pointing out that it is in fact milder and not the same thing. And not indicative of a conspiracy.

Have you read the thread? We have had multiple instances of posters recounting personal experiences and almost immediately afterwards there's a slew of posts explaining to them what really happened and that they were overreacting / reacting incorrectly.

That's dismissing.

--Kaiser-- · 28-05-2013 03:18PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

A Boards thread never killed anyone or led to a volcanic eruption...?

Yet

secondrowgal · 28-05-2013 03:19PM

PucaMama wrote: »

all the guys i bedded? what do you think i am? a prostitute?

i asked for proof that girls will do anything for footballers

also, and its not just me who thinks this, calling a woman a girl is belittling and is often used by POA at a possible target. if you read any of their stuff any woman who is not seen as a target or who wont fall for their little games is a "woman" yet anywho do are "girls"

Sorry to go off topic, but can I ask why you equate with bedding lots of men with people thinking that you are a prostitute? I appreciate that you were replying ironically to another's post, but I am genuinely interested. Why should anyone think that an adult (male or female) that beds as many people as they like is a prostitute? For me, it just highlights the "slut" culture - i.e. men who bed lots of women are studs, women who bed lots of men are slags/sluts, etc. This doesn't help with the rape debate either, IMHO.

I hope you don't think that I am having a go in any way at you, it was not my intention at all - it's just something that jumped out at me.

Thanks.

wonderfulname · 28-05-2013 03:23PM

B0jangles wrote: »

And I know you are gay, I've noticed over the years that gay men are among the quickest to dismiss the experiences of women.

This is a new one... It has to be my least favourite thing to see, where in one breath a person smears an entire subgroup of the population whilst simultaniously lamenting that treatment towards another.

starling · 28-05-2013 03:25PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

;84819167"]In my experience, most do. Just my own experience. I have a lot of girl friends and the number of times they've asked me why a guy won't chase them is absolutely ridiculous. It's like "You've signalled that you're not interested, if he persists it would be creepy", and you get all this ridiculousness about "The Rules" and all that sh!te.

Your friends are idiots, that's your problem.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Not in my experience. In my experience there are a ridiculous number of variables involved, unless you're doing something overtly creepy. Some girls I know find it creepy just to be approached by a stranger in a club. Not kidding.

See above re: idiots.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Right. But the problem is there have been plenty examples in this thread of people having boundaries which are out of the ordinary. As I said earlier, if someone got offended by a handshake you'd find it unusual, and if I was someone who didn't like shaking hands I'd explain myself to people instead of acting like there was nothing wrong.

No there haven't actually been examples of that. There have been people defending their "right" to touch other people. It's not unusual for women not to like being grabbed from behind but those who insisted that Leggo's friend was just being affectionate put out the straw man of "people who can't stand being touched at all"

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I just take issue with the entire concept of having a problem with something a person does - it doesn't have to be in this context by the way, I mean in any and all areas of life - and instead of making it simple and confronting them, pretending it's fine and talking about them behind their back.

Yes we're agreed on that point let it go.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm not even going to comment on this one. It's offensive because it implies that most men have a warped attitude to women which is not true, any more than it would be true to imply that most women have X negative quality. It's an offensive generalization.

Nothing I said in relation to the MCSR project is untrue. Please educate yourself about what they do before taking offense. Rapists are not dodgy looking guys in trenchcoats, they are for the most part totally "normal" guys.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

What is sexual to one person is not necessarily sexual to another, that's why this one causes problems. What you think of as "unwanted sexual contact" someone else might think of as being friendly.

We've already discussed this, I'm not going over it again.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And I just don't buy the argument that this is part of a wider conspiracy. Some individuals are douchebags, some are not. It's not some kind of organized mass campaign, as people seem to be implying.

Nobody implied any such thing. It's not a secret conspiracy, it's the unquestioning acceptance of dangerous notions about women and sex that people receive from the culture around them.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If there was "rape culture" then society would think that raping someone is acceptable. And it doesn't. At least, the majority don't. If a minority of people are douchebags, a minority of people are douchebags. To suggest that it's a gigantic conspiracy just seems too hyperbolic.

Rape culture has already been explained in this thread. It's not that "society" thinks rape is okay, it's that people accept and perpetuate myths that make it easier for rapists to rape and get away with it and more difficult fr victims to report and prosecute.

B0jangles · 28-05-2013 03:26PM

wonderfulname wrote: »

This is a new one... It has to be my least favourite thing to see, where in one breath a person smears an entire subgroup of the population whilst simultaniously lamenting that treatment towards another.

I'm sorry you see it that way - it's just a personal observation I have made over the years interacting with my brother, his boyfriend and our shared gay friends. I did not say that all gay men are dismissive of womens issues, just that many seem to assume that because they get as gay men get regularly treated badly by society, that they have a better insight into problems from a woman's perspective than they actually do.

kunst nugget · 28-05-2013 03:27PM

wonderfulname wrote: »

This is a new one... It has to be my least favourite thing to see, where in one breath a person smears an entire subgroup of the population whilst simultaniously lamenting that treatment towards another.

There was debate earlier on about the use of the term passive-aggression. That looked like a prime example of it to me…

starling · 28-05-2013 03:29PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Who cares? Satire is satire, who it's satirising is completely irrelevant. Either we have freedom of speech or we don't.

There's a difference between free speech and hate speech. There's a difference between censorship and the refusal to accept racism. It's about time everyone knew that.

wonderfulname · 28-05-2013 03:31PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

There was debate earlier on about the use of the term passive-aggression. That looked like a prime example of it to me…

Honestly it hit a point where if a post had the word hug in it I stopped reading, so I may have missed that one if it is in there.

starling · 28-05-2013 03:31PM

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

These threads never really go anywhere and usually dissolve into hysteria and vitriol. To be honest it should have been closed when there were about 200 posts about grabbing girls from behind for unwelcome back hugs

FTFY

starling · 28-05-2013 03:36PM

up for anything wrote: »

Not sure why you stuck in that bit about women's fantasies and Nancy Friday into that paragraph? Fantasies are just that.

What exactly do you mean by often when you say

What is often? Do you have statistics? I doubt that most victims OFTEN try to repeat the experience as a form of catharsis. You've been watching too much crappy television.

He's just a troll.

Is rape always rape? Are men always to blame?

Comments