A: Stanford sexual assault case: victim impact statement in full | US news | The Guardian
The blame is always, ALWAYS with the rapist, no matter which way you spin it. No matter which way you spin it. It doesn't matter how drunk she was, or how drunk you were, or if she was dancing half-naked anyway. It is your obligation as a man to keep your hands and parts to yourself until she gives you full consent to enter her. Anything else, is unspeakable violence. UNSPEAKABLE violence. This is not a feminist argument, this is a human one.
B: This is very obviously rape, but Technical point;
If two voluntarily drunk people consent to sex while drunk and then both cry rape after the act, they are in fact, both not rapists.
I'd go so far as to say that consent while voluntarily drunk is still consent. In the same way that murder while voluntarily drunk, is still murder.
A: She has to be sober enough to voluntarily consent. Then yes, I agree. But if her consent is not clear, the onus is on him to wait till he gets it, or leave her the hell alone.
Me: Err.
If a drunk man and a drunk woman have sex, who raped who?
A: Oh please don't make me roll my eyes. It's always you, isn't it.
Me: How this school's old anti-rape poster sparked new controversy | The Daily Dot
A: Still rolling my eyes.
Me: OK. So basically men should be treated differently from women.
A: STILL rolling my eyes!!!
B: Actually I would treat consent as a lack of rejection. "Yes" is not always the form of consent most used. It's usually non-verbal.
And to leave what constitutes "yes" up to a judge is also idiotic.
Because i could spend the entire night humping you and making out and the second you jump on my dick I cry rape.
Which would be utterly unfair for you.
A: Consent is the lack of rejection?! That's the worst, most horrifying definition of consent I have ever heard! There's a reason why there are laws defining consent! Definitions like this!
Me: Fortunately affirmative consent is not a legal standard
Consent is contested and nebulous, as with romantic relations in general
A: This, UNfortunately, is true
Now wouldn't it be easier for everyone if there WERE laws that made affirmative consent a legal standard?
D: no. not really. put a law in and someone will find a way to get around it. there is also a problem that people have abused consent. the numbers might not be big, but it's really not helping. it comes down to a question of "he said, she said".
plus, filling in a contract before being intimate, is a real downer.
Me: Nope.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/10/why-a-college-student-abandoned-affirmative-consent/381650/?single_page=true#disqus_thread
"I was raised by a left-leaning, feminist family who (at least I thought at the time) were relatively open about sex. But while I arrived at college with a healthy respect for women, I was totally unprepared for the complex realities of female sexuality...
On our second night together, one of my first partners threw up her hands in disgust. “How am I supposed to get turned on when you keep asking for permission for everything like a little boy?” She said. “Just take me and fuck me already.”"
http://www.npr.org/2014/06/13/321677110/a-campus-dilemma-sure-no-means-no-but-exactly-what-means-yes
"The fact of the matter is that consent is very tricky, and you're getting into minutiae of what happened in a particular event," she says. "It will sometimes boil down to details like who turned who around, or [whether] she lifted up her body so [another student] could pull down her pants. "There have been plenty of cases that I've done when the accused student says, 'What do you mean? [The accuser] was moaning with pleasure. He was raising his body, clutching my back, exhibiting all signs that sounded like this was a pleasurable event.' "
https://newrepublic.com/article/119459/californias-campus-consent-laws-every-sex-act-potential-crime
"Much of what we call courtship—and the pleasures therein—revolves around sending, reading, interpreting, and changing these signals. Surely a misunderstanding should be judged under the law differently than an outright desire to harm. Surely we are all guilty of trying to convince people to have sex with us. Are we rapists? Surely, we have all enjoyed a little drunken cavorting"
http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk3/ftp04/NQ56282.pdf
"65% of both men and women either agreed or strongly agreed that verbally asking for sexual consent is awkward"
http://www.presstelegram.com/government-and-politics/20140608/students-question-affirmative-consent-bill-designed-to-combat-sexual-assaults
"“Are there guidelines? Are we supposed to check every five minutes?” The remark drew laughter from his friend and fellow 49er, Sue Tang. “If you were to do that, it would definitely kill the vibe,”"
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/06/09/california-lawmakers-would-require-students-get-yes-sex
"How does a person prove they receive consent "shy of having it videotaped"... the bill is inherently “reversing” the traditional presumption of innocence for those accused because the accused now have to prove they did get permission to be found not guilty... The bill, as currently written, puts the onus on getting consent from the "initiating" partner. That could also cause confusion. “That’s going to be a question – who initiated the sexual activity – it’s not always clear who initiated the sexual activity”"
A: not really. Consent is as easy as saying - you ok with this? Or, you wanna do this? Or, you sure this is ok? And voila! You've got consent!
This is truly NOT complicated.
Me: What if she doesn't give a clear answer? Not all women are so confident that they will say yes all the time. A feminist might say that under patriarchy women are shamed into being unable to openly say they want to have sex. In which case, good luck getting a yes.
And sometimes women say no when they mean yes (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3379584)
A: If she says no, then don't fucking touch her! Its not your job to read her mind. It's your job to ask her, and if she says no (even if she means yes), it's a goddamn no. Back the fuck off of her! And if she really does want to jump you, do this a few times and she's gonna give you a proper Yes sooner or later.
And if she "doesn't give a clear answer" then you haven't got consent! Don't assume that you do!
This is pretty much what this victim means when she talks about how men need to understand and be clear about how to recognise consent. Jesus Christ.
B: A your examples are not common or culturally normal.
A: B that is a purely subjective statement. And I disagree completely.
B: A not really, we can have a poll and I'd win.
And by your definition, all porn is rape depiction, all my partners and a likely, a majority of yours were technical rapists at several points in their lives, and it would give actual rapists massive immunity from legal consequences since all they have to do is say they were raped by their victims.
Also, gender is quite irrelevant on this subject. So people in general need to have clearer definitions. Or we need massive cultural shift on a global scale(not gonna happen).
Me: I Was Taught To Be Ashamed Of My Sexuality
E: Awful AWFUL conversations like this are why rape is so difficult to prove and women (especially) are so afraid to speak out against it and to come forward and charge rapists with the act of rape. Watch this video, it might explain a few things in very simple terms. Tea Consent - YouTube
Me: That's a great analogy
In some cultures it's considered rude to ask for tea. A good host is supposed to ask. And you're supposed to say no. And he's supposed to insist.
A: OH MY GOD. SUCH BULLSHIT. SUCH COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT AND I AM LITERALLY NAUSEOUS FROM WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
E: Gabriel are YOU a rapist? If not, why is this so difficult for you and why would you ever conceive of defending them?
Me: I've said a lot about this subject. I don't think I've anything new to add. You can read my previous points if you want. I'm not the only person who thinks affirmative consent is a bad thing. Evidently there're tons of rapists out there.
Cheers.
B: E he isn't. He's simply stating that these definitions make many people technical rapists. And he(like myself) is simply defending innocent people who would be victims of blackmail or entrapment.
A: CONSENT IS NOT CULTURALLY NEGOTIABLE
B: That said, I've been accused of rape on several occasions. Make of that what you will.
A: Well that explains alot.
If you have been accused of rape, and if you have been accused of it because you failed to obtain consent before you shoved parts of yourself into a woman, then you HAVE committed rape.
B: Lol, it was a blackmail attempt by the person that stabbed me.
A: If you did rape her, I am honestly glad she stabbed you. I also wish she had put you behind bars.
B: A actually we had consensual sex on many occasions.
She stabbed me because I stopped her from smashing a cat against the wall.
A: Your statements are no longer relevant to this discussion.
B: Actually they prove how inefficient your system of definitions are. We are at an impasse as to whether or not I'm a rapist.
A: We are not. You are making very little sense right now.
B: Im just saying, by your vague definitions, actual rapists will get away with it 99% of the time.
It's harmful to civilisation as a whole.
A: My definitions are very clear. I think I will stop here because this is a pointless conversation. I think both you and Gabriel need to do some serious thinking. Because people who think like you are certainly harmful to civilisation as a whole.
F: So, let me get this straight...
Gabriel and B are glad that there are no laws defining consent because they don't want their actions to be classified as rape.
Seriously guys, what the hell is wrong with you? You sound like you really don't care whether the person you're having sex with actually wants to have sex with you. B if you've been accused of rape on several occasions then you most probably are a rapist. You seem overly focuses on whether your actions are legal, while not showing any concern about whether you are in fact engaging in mutual sex or rape. That's horrifying.
D: again the crux of affirmative consent is, that at the end of the day, it's a "he said, she said" situation, with the accused being guilty until proven innocent. Until these two situations are remedied, the system is always going to be problematic because there will be way too many, people that abuse it, because it is too easy to abuse
B: Actually F, my point is about protecting innocent people. So I'm taking emotion out of the equation.
For example, when was the last time you expressly asked for verbal consent before sex?
Because most consent is non-verbal.
And the problem with non-verbal consent is it's often misunderstood and quite impossible to define.
F: Your point is about protecting people accused of rape, not protecting victims of rape. Do you actually care about victims of rape? Are you careful to make sure that you always have consent and don't inadvertently rape someone? Would it bother you if you did in fact rape someone? I think these are relevant questions considering the focus of your comments is exclusively on people accused of rape such as yourself.
B: actually I do. Because I know a few victims whose orgasms or actions(thrusts) were considered non-verbal consent despite the fact that they made clear attempts at rejection.
So... The existing system of definitions is horrendously inefficient.
D: A I make sure that I always have consent. But the morning after, or a week on, it's more than easy to say "oh shit, what did I do? Let's just say he raped me and let him take the rap." consent does not negate regret and because of its nature, it becomes easy to abuse.
It might also be a slippery slope argument, but if both parties are drunk, and they had sex, if the girl becomes pregnant, can the guy say he was coerced and therefore not be responsible for the child?
B: This is actually a fascinating example of the phrase,
"To those accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression".
F: D you say it's 'more than easy' but in fact it isn't. There are many consequences for outing yourself as a rape victim - social, financial, career, etc. Research shows that rape isn't falsely reported any more often than any other crime (around 5%), so why the focus on those few cases of false reporting instead of the large amount which aren't false, and the much larger amount that go unreported due to the aforementioned consequences?
I find it really tiresome that whenever someone starts a conversation about rapists and rape victims, a bunch of men come along and try to make the conversation all about men who don't rape and women who lie about being raped and rape that isn't really rape.
Men, take a good look at yourselves. You are part of the problem. Your unwillingness to face this issue is part of the problem.
Except for you E. You're awesome.
D: F, because being accused of rape is a life sentence. Even if one of acquitted, especially if one of acquitted, the same stigma follows the accused. I'd like to see the research on the impact of being accused of rape - social, financial, career etc. Now capital punishment has checks and balances in place. Being accused of rape, doesn't. And there is no recourse.
What IS the issue though? That affirmative consent is not actively sought often enough ? Or that human communication is bloody ambiguous? Or the ease of going back and saying it wasn't me, it was him? This clip was meant to be a joke, but in the world today, it's becoming scarily real Kontraband Contract - YouTube
B: Not sure why gender is being brought into this... I thought everyone got raped.
F: D it appears my point went completely over your head. I'm not interested in a detailed explanation of why you try to turn conversations about actual rapists and actual rape victims into conversations about women who lie and men who get their lives ruined. I was merely pointing out that you are doing it, and that it is tiresome. Do you interject something about false accusations into every discussion about rape that you come across? Or just the ones that are about specific rape cases like the one in this article where there were witnesses and the rapist was convicted? I cannot see why you think it important to make those comments in this context.
D: anyone who knows me, knows that i'm immensely protective of my friends. I have no problems with consent, because it's something i do as a matter of principle. I don't see how, pointing out potential abuses to legalizing it, and how it still won't change the way society functions, becomes me legitimizing rape.
It is also difficult to have a discussion, when bringing up an opposing point of view for discussion, means I'm now demonized, just because I'm against group think and mob justice. Incidentally, I personally think the brat should be chemically castrated and spend at least the next decade in jail.
D: Such is the sad reality genuine human rights advocates have to manage.
C: I'm sorry to say A, but I think some of your facebook friends are potential rapists... :/ Don't get how it's so hard to understand: Don't have sex with someone that can't have sex with you back...doesn't matter if the person made out with you a minute before. Don't be a rapist, have patience and wait until you can both actively participate. Not so hard for normal intellectuals to understand
A: No I'm sorry C. These people never really were and certainly are not my friends.
I apologise for the filth that has just blackened my facebook wall.
C: Not your fault :) They read your post and felt offended...says a lot!
Addendum:
Someone: Sometimes I don't know whether to admire your patience or to question your sanity