How would you feel if your partner confessed that they had raped someone?

[Dyslexicea]

No.

I'm trying to explain that it is not a matter of hurting or not hurting someone, but merely the threshold that determines what is still okay and what is not. And this threshold does not as much base upon ethical values as you might think. Milgrams experiment has proven this.

You would have to bring up an experiment which happens to have not only been unethical but also refuted my many.

The Milgram experiment depended upon an authority figure being present and actively encouraging the participants. Rapes for the most part are done with no one other than the perpetrator and the victim being present. Secondly the experiment was flawed because it's been proved in subsequent studies that many of the participants who do go to the top level feel the responsibility was that of the authority figures and that person would not allow real harm to be done, not only on moral grounds but also legal grounds.

The only type of rape which Milgram would apply to is gang rape where one to the rapist was an authority figure. Even in gang rape, according to Milgram, if men had any ethical values 36% would not participate, which of course would stop the rape, the 64% would stop for fear of being convicted of rape. Your point really is meaningless, other than to prove in all rapes the rapist lack values, morals and empathy for their victims.

Said the girl who gets raped in a foreign country, runs to the police there and gets put in jail instead, because rape is not illegal there, but premarital sex is.

Your knowledge about the world is depressingly as accurate as foreigners think about us.

No, what's depressing is this. "For a rape conviction to actually be handed down, Dubai law mandates either a confession from the rapist or a witness account from four adult males. And with neither of those things readily available, along with laws on the books that make extramarital sex illegal, women reporting rape are likely to find themselves as the subject of criminal investigation and, often, harsh sentencing."

What's even more depressing is our State Department doesn't even have a strong travel warning against visiting countries like Dubai. I wonder if men were raped in Dubai and put in jail for being raped if there wouldn't be a travel ban? What's really sad is I don't even need anyone to answer the question I already know the answer.

 

[Marquis]

I was too drunk to actively engage in sex, too drunk to do anything when he turned me over and took my ass for my first anal sex.

Hot.

When I woke up the next morning I was naked on the balcony covered with a sheet. I went back into the room and..well he was a total ass..the details of that morning are far too humiliating to go into.

Are you sure?

But did that make him a rapist?

I'm sorry, but to me, no the situation that you describe is most definitely not a rape. Sadism and callousness aside, I cannot say whether this man had ever committed a rape, but I think if you were sober enough to go to the bathroom and insert a prophylactic sponge you were sober enough to say "I don't want to have sex with you." You put yourself in a vulnerable position and decided your most comfortable option was to consent to sex you may normally not have had. From what you described, I don't see his behavior as coercive or even predatory, certainly aggressive, but not criminal.

Yes, he is a rapist.

When someone fucks someone who is too drunk to say yes or no, they have raped that person. When someone fucks someone who is afraid to say no-- that is rape. (that's happened to me twice, I've felt no horrible after effects, and neither time was not violent-- but I was aware that I should have felt able to say no, and was not.)

You DID say no-- "only in your dreams" is "no."

You had two drinks that got you incredibly drunk? more than you would have expected?

Men like this guy don't stop with just you. He's been doing this to other women all along, and I'll bet if you named him you'd get a lot of women suddenly speaking up.

Let's look at each of the arguments you are making here:

1. When someone fucks someone who is too drunk to say yes or no, they have raped that person.

Really? So only sober sex not rape? Really? If this is the case then there is a hell of a lot more rape going on then I ever thought. Someone should tell all these girls who go out and get drunk and go home and have sex with someone (possibly their husbands) that they are being raped. Many will be surprised to hear it, I'm sure.

2. When someone fucks someone who is afraid to say no-- that is rape.

Again, really? What if the first someone did nothing to instill the fear, and isn't aware of it?

3. You DID say no-- "only in your dreams" is "no."

No doesn't mean no forever. We both know this. I appreciate that you are being supportive of ecstaticsub, but let's get real for a second.

4. You had two drinks that got you incredibly drunk? more than you would have expected?

Funny how quickly you are jumping to this conclusion. I honestly question whether date rape drugs are as common as they are made out to be. I would have no idea where to get a date rape drug. Although I guess that isn't too crazy because I wouldn't know where to get a lot of drugs. Which is a shame, but I feel like if I was trying to find a date rape drug it would be a lot harder than finding, say weed or coke or ecstasy.

Not saying that date rape drugs don't exist or drug induced date rapes don't happen, but as a 6'2", 200lb male, I have been in plenty of situations where I have been surprised at how tipsy I've gotten on a few drinks that were stronger than I thought, especially if I were low on sleep, hadn't eaten and were exhausted.

Again, not saying I know what happened, but I look at these stories with kind of an Occham's Razer perspective.

5. Men like this guy don't stop with just you. He's been doing this to other women all along, and I'll bet if you named him you'd get a lot of women suddenly speaking up.

So now our guy is a rapist and he's been doing this all along. Of course, you could be absolutely right, but he could just as easily be a clueless testosterone fueled male who sees getting laid as the best thing that can possibly happen for him during a college conference or whatever. He may be the kind of guy who would never force sex on a woman who showed clear signs of resistance, but that isn't what happened here, at least from what we've heard so far.

The Rake is one of the primary archetypes of romantic characters for women. He may be teasing, pushy and overcome with lust, but that doesn't make him a rapist. For a lot of women that makes him an ideal sex partner.

It's never a good idea, but if you're a guy the punishment for it is usually a hangover.

Or having your car stolen or getting beat up or any number of things that can happen. Of course, those things can happen to women too, and men are a lot like less likely to be raped, but we know this already, right?

it doesn't matter if rape is legal in some country or another.

Rape is horribly close to being legal in the US, when the official reaction to Steubenville is "we gotta teach those boys not to take pictures of themselves raping girls, because it hurts their careers," and Ivy league says that women who call a rape a rape are harming the reputation of the university so the board will call it "assault" instead.

This I totally agree with. I've seen it.

The Steubenville boys should've gotten life. Not just because what they did was pure evil, but because it would be better for our society. Imagine how careful guys would be if they knew the law was that protective of women't right to say no. I guess it's a bit of a cycle.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Hot.



Are you sure?



I'm sorry, but to me, no the situation that you describe is most definitely not a rape. Sadism and callousness aside, I cannot say whether this man had ever committed a rape, but I think if you were sober enough to go to the bathroom and insert a prophylactic sponge you were sober enough to say "I don't want to have sex with you." You put yourself in a vulnerable position and decided your most comfortable option was to consent to sex you may normally not have had. From what you described, I don't see his behavior as coercive or even predatory, certainly aggressive, but not criminal.

It wouldn't be easy for you to see his behavior as a smaller, weaker woman might see it, that is true. But Me? I am 5"7, and in the days when I was doing men, I wieghed 120, and I was not a fighter. Trust me, his behavior would have pressured me into opening my legs, no matter what I would have preferred. Because your definition of "comfortable" is my definition of "I don't want to be beaten up and have to try to get to the hospital."

Of course it isn't 'criminal" but a lot of rape isn't criminal because men wrote the laws. I know it's awful to think that the victims of these actions have decided to define the actions. But there it is.

Let's look at each of the arguments you are making here:

1. When someone fucks someone who is too drunk to say yes or no, they have raped that person.

Really? So only sober sex not rape? Really? If this is the case then there is a hell of a lot more rape going on then I ever thought. Someone should tell all these girls who go out and get drunk and go home and have sex with someone (possibly their husbands) that they are being raped. Many will be surprised to hear it, I'm sure.

Sex with someone who cannot say yes is rape. Sex with someone who is too drunk to say yes is rape. it's a brand new concept, but you can learn it.

Again, really? What if the first someone did nothing to instill the fear, and isn't aware of it?

They need to learn to be aware of the fear, and I know that women have a habit of hiding the fact that some dude makes them afraid. That's because we tend to worry that our fear might inspire him to violence. Whether you think that's possible is unimportant, plenty of women will tell you their stories.

If the guy is unaware of the fear he's instilled? Something else is missing from his mind as well. Or, he's lying.

3. You DID say no-- "only in your dreams" is "no."

No doesn't mean no forever. We both know this. I appreciate that you are being supportive of ecstaticsub, but let's get real for a second.

No has to mean "no forever, or else it means "no untill you pester or scare me into saying yes." Women do indeed say no when they mean yes, because they know that men don't stop at no. But if men did stop at no, women would learn-- would actually have the freedom-- to say yes.

4. You had two drinks that got you incredibly drunk? more than you would have expected?

Funny how quickly you are jumping to this conclusion. I honestly question whether date rape drugs are as common as they are made out to be. I would have no idea where to get a date rape drug. Although I guess that isn't too crazy because I wouldn't know where to get a lot of drugs. Which is a shame, but I feel like if I was trying to find a date rape drug it would be a lot harder than finding, say weed or coke or ecstasy.

Not saying that date rape drugs don't exist or drug induced date rapes don't happen, but as a 6'2", 200lb male, I have been in plenty of situations where I have been surprised at how tipsy I've gotten on a few drinks that were stronger than I thought, especially if I were low on sleep, hadn't eaten and were exhausted.

Again, not saying I know what happened, but I look at these stories with kind of an Occham's Razer perspective.

You could find out where to get Roipnol if you wanted to, Marquise.

5. Men like this guy don't stop with just you. He's been doing this to other women all along, and I'll bet if you named him you'd get a lot of women suddenly speaking up.

So now our guy is a rapist and he's been doing this all along. Of course, you could be absolutely right, but he could just as easily be a clueless testosterone fueled male who sees getting laid as the best thing that can possibly happen for him during a college conference or whatever. He may be the kind of guy who would never force sex on a woman who showed clear signs of resistance, but that isn't what happened here, at least from what we've heard so far.

That's what he probably does see himself as, you are quite right. And he probably has never noticed how unwilling some of those women were. Which is why it's time to speak up. because I'm sure he doesn't actually want to be considered a rapist. But some women are remembering him as one.

The Rake is one of the primary archetypes of romantic characters for women. He may be teasing, pushy and overcome with lust, but that doesn't make him a rapist. For a lot of women that makes him an ideal sex partner.

The rake is a male archetype. Written by men. Women... I doubt you've actually read any rakes as women write them. they tend to be more sensitive mind reading types, and they are attractive to the woman they've set their sights on. They don't give her any reason to say no.

This I totally agree with. I've seen it.

The Steubenville boys should've gotten life. Not just because what they did was pure evil, but because it would be better for our society. Imagine how careful guys would be if they knew the law was that protective of women't right to say no. I guess it's a bit of a cycle.

yep... Supposing some woman said "no" meaning "Pursue me and seduce me" and he apologised and left her alone. Next time that happened she might still be shocked and surprised, but the third time? She might actually say "Persue and seduce me, baby, you've got a chance."

Or even, "yeah, let's get out of here and go to my place."

Or even, "Yeah, and you know what? I want to get shitfaced drunk before you screw me, are you into that? "

 

[KoPilot]

Yeah I saw that coming.

No; destroying someone's life is destroying someone's life, if I must spell it out, whether it's rape, killing someone's father, blowing limbs off, or arresting someone's son in front of them, never to be seen again.

That's extremely reductive and not at all a useful comparison to draw.

We can address emotional trauma and PTSD on their own terms. We don't need to compare war vets, who operate in a completely different culture, to that of a guy who slips girls roofies at parties or doesn't take no for an answer after inviting her to his place and dancing with her at a club, and who do these things of no one's volition but their own.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I know how frustrating it is to have a single point nitpicked. I did read your entire post stella, and several good points did stand out to me. There is this, though.



Are we to be mind readers now? We talk about communication here all the time; if someone is practiced at hiding fear, are we supposed to instantly see that fear in their eyes anyway? If it's so easy to see, it's definitely going to draw a reaction from the very predators such facade is meant to assuage.

If someone has phobias, or an only tangentially related panic attack, do you expect people to just magically know the source of that reaction, assuming it isn't well hidden?

Dude, really.
If I break your arm by total accident, and I never thought that your arm was so fragile, your fucking arm is still broken, right?

 

[marieR19]

The whole point of it is that consent can't be granted by minors so the statement that it was a consensual activity is inherently wrong.

But that was my entire point. A "minor" is completely up to wherever they happen to live, NOT their mentality or mental capability to consent. In my state, "age of consent" is 18. However, within the United States alone, there are also states where that age is 17, 16, and if you go down towards lower North America it can go all the way down to 13. Are we supposed to believe that 13 year olds in one location are THAT much more mature and mentally aware then 13 year olds in a location where the age is 18? My entire point is the entire "age of consent" concept is bullshit, because everyone develops mentally (and physically) at different rates. No one can say for sure that all 16 year olds in my state are incapable of comprehending all the consequences and realities of having sex.... And that all 18 year olds ARE. But that's what the law tries to do anyways.

This is an interesting attitude. I've read this one multiple times in this thread.

So it's important that he was punished for it in the past and not so much what kind of person he is now?

I wouldn't put it that way. I never said that I *wouldn't* take into account the kind of person he is today. I'm simply saying that in order for a friendship or relationship to even be an *option*, the rapist needs to have done something to reform themselves, be it jail or therapy or whatever. It would be stupid to go "oh he spent time in jail, so it doesn't matter if he acts violent nowadays, he did what he needed to do so I'm safe!", of course I would look at what kind of person he is now, if I feel safe while talking to him or being around him, if anything he says raises any red flags, etc etc. But what happened after the rape IS a big deal to me.

 

[BrightlyGo]

Are we to be mind readers now? We talk about communication here all the time; if someone is practiced at hiding fear, are we supposed to instantly see that fear in their eyes anyway? If it's so easy to see, it's definitely going to draw a reaction from the very predators such facade is meant to assuage.

Part of the point is that you can't tell what someone is thinking or feeling or 'really means,' so the whole 'no means yes' paradigm is garbage. You can make a guess, if you feel you're good at 'reading' people, but if you guess wrong it's on you.

One of the many articles that have been linked so far put forth an idea that consent isn't just a one-time on-off switch, and isn't just revocable, but anything short of continuous and enthusiastic consent should be taken as no consent at all. i can't remember which one or exactly what they called the idea, but it sounded like a good idea, to me. Not sure what your partner's thinking/feeling about what you're doing because you're not a mind-reader? Stop. Better to ruin the moment than ruin a life.

It shouldn't take an exceptional person to do that.

If I break your arm by total accident, and I never thought that your arm was so fragile, your fucking arm is still broken, right?

Yes. And, if it was really an accident, you committed a 'tort' instead of a crime, and may owe compensation instead of going to prison. If you were doing some heavy S&M play, and a broken arm resulted, your bottom might not blame you at all, and you'd face no legal difficulties.

No; destroying someone's life is destroying someone's life, if I must spell it out, whether it's rape, killing someone's father, blowing limbs off, or arresting someone's son in front of them, never to be seen again.

And some people can do awful things like that and go on living like it was nothing, some regret it and cope anyway, and some are tormented and even destroyed by it. Was that the point?

Each of those ways of destroying another's life is horrible, but they're not morally or ethically equivalent.

 

[drunkenphilosophy]

I have discovered that I can no longer predict how I would feel or what I would do in a hypothetical situation until it actually happens.

So I simply don't know.

This. Although rape is too big a crime to get over, for me. Statutory, revoked consent, vague consent - still rape.

 

[Netzach]

What if we de-stigmatized saying "yes"

so that women knew to say it and men knew to expect it and look for it, and listen for it, and even ASK for it.... and - for the sake of covering their own ass if nothing else

I mean I think world of ambiguity would be a lot less so if more guys were looking to hear an overt "yes" and looking to make sure the signals were all saying the same thing.

What if "no means no" were ditched in favor of "so, how do you know yes is really YES!"

 

[Netzach]

Yeah I saw that coming.

No; destroying someone's life is destroying someone's life, if I must spell it out, whether it's rape, killing someone's father, blowing limbs off, or arresting someone's son in front of them, never to be seen again.

No. They're not the same. And I say this because I feel like in some ways it's giving the latter short shrift, in some ways it's giving the former short shrift. Also, nobody gets to spell out FOR a victim what the actions are "supposed to mean" - if someone doesn't feel totally destroyed and decimated we have to make sure s/he knows s/he is?

 

[KoPilot]

Now you're being very specific.

My reductive comparison was in response to the vagueness of "how can someone destroy someone's life and just go on with their own?"

People do move on. There are many people who make a living by wrecking other peoples lives, one way or another. The usual coping mechanism is de-humanization. If it's not right, its not right in any context, but people move on just the same.

I wasn't asking how it happened. I was saying that it doesn't happen without fucking with your head.

It's completely within your right to forgive anyone for any little thing that they've done if you want, but that's the sort of thing that's majorly screwed me over in the past. Screwed people I know over. Screwed cultures over. So I'm not real big on it.

You're still being reductive, no matter how "specific" my example was. Citing a supposed vagueness, when you know this isn't nearly as vague as you're making it out to be, is pretty intellectually dishonest.

 

[Primalex]

But that was my entire point. A "minor" is completely up to wherever they happen to live, NOT their mentality or mental capability to consent. In my state, "age of consent" is 18. However, within the United States alone, there are also states where that age is 17, 16, and if you go down towards lower North America it can go all the way down to 13. Are we supposed to believe that 13 year olds in one location are THAT much more mature and mentally aware then 13 year olds in a location where the age is 18? My entire point is the entire "age of consent" concept is bullshit, because everyone develops mentally (and physically) at different rates.

But what is your solution? The requirement that your boyfriend sends you to a psychologist to assess your mental capabilities and to receive the allowance to have sex with you? This is not really feasible, isn't it?

All concepts of "You need to be this x, to do y" discriminate certain individuals one way or the other - drinking, driving, voting, fucking - there is not really a difference. There are for sure 14-year-olds out there that can drive better than some 16-year-olds.

Imagine you put in a law that cares about your mental capabilities and you say:"Yes", but a psychologist determined afterwards that you were not able to consent - and your partner ends up in jail and had not even a clue that he could get in trouble. Is this really better?

The current concept is not great, but it does provide a predictability of legal decisions and this is imho one of the most important things.

 

[Stella_Omega]

so when you say "when a guy causes fear he knows it," you're talking specifically about abusers and battered partners, and emphatically not about some random person on the bus with the intimidating tattoos and muscle mass to throw you out the window, if they so chose?

Is that a closer read to your original intent?

We have been talking about men who intimidate women into opening their legs. That's pretty much what we've been talking about. Guys on busses are scary too, yes. But this thread is about rape and rapists.

What if we de-stigmatized saying "yes"

so that women knew to say it and men knew to expect it and look for it, and listen for it, and even ASK for it.... and - for the sake of covering their own ass if nothing else

I mean I think world of ambiguity would be a lot less so if more guys were looking to hear an overt "yes" and looking to make sure the signals were all saying the same thing.

What if "no means no" were ditched in favor of "so, how do you know yes is really YES!"

This! this , thisthis this.

 

[Primalex]

What are you talking about? You make no fucking sense, Primalex. Seriously. Your question was not "which countries allow rape". You didn't say "countries", you said "a world where rape is legal", which I took to mean "the whole world has decided rape is legal", - which I thought was a pointless hypothetical.

a)
"Does green weight more than blue?" is a question that makes no sense and is pointless hypothetical regarding rape.
The question:"Will there be more rape if rape is legal?" is neither pointless, nor hypothetical, nor senseless.


b)
I never ever said "world". You did. My question was:

Will there be more rape if rape is legal and if yes, how can a law affect what is wrong in a mind?

I can't see any geographical reference in there - why would there be anyway, the question is valid even for astronauts on the ISS.

 

[Primalex]

if someone doesn't feel totally destroyed and decimated we have to make sure s/he knows s/he is?

The sad part is, that this is really true.

Come on, imagine a girlfriend would come up and tell you that she was raped - but that she feels fine and it's of no importance for her. Would you rest the case now? Come on.

 

[dmetria]

a)
"Does green weight more than blue?" is a question that makes no sense and is pointless hypothetical regarding rape.
The question:"Will there be more rape if rape is legal?" is neither pointless, nor hypothetical, nor senseless.


b)
I never ever said "world". You did. My question was:

Will there be more rape if rape is legal and if yes, how can a law affect what is wrong in a mind?

I can't see any geographical reference in there - why would there be anyway, the question is valid even for astronauts on the ISS.

awesome!! great logic!!

 

[MellowTone]

What if we de-stigmatized saying "yes"

so that women knew to say it and men knew to expect it and look for it, and listen for it, and even ASK for it.... and - for the sake of covering their own ass if nothing else

I mean I think world of ambiguity would be a lot less so if more guys were looking to hear an overt "yes" and looking to make sure the signals were all saying the same thing.

What if "no means no" were ditched in favor of "so, how do you know yes is really YES!"

so much yes.

 

[Netzach]

The sad part is, that this is really true.

Come on, imagine a girlfriend would come up and tell you that she was raped - but that she feels fine and it's of no importance for her. Would you rest the case now? Come on.

Probably not without a larger picture in my personal life, but in theory I like the idea that it's kind of a fuck off and I own my experience stance in some cases, and generally people are their own best experts, etc. If it's someone I have any knowledge of as a person, I'm not going to dismiss it, let's put it that way.

"It's of no importance to me" I have trouble buying but "I've dealt with it, it doesn't define me, worse things have actually happened to me..." You bet.

 

[Netzach]

I didn't say guys there, Stella.

But lets take that same person and put them in a bar. Some people might be intimidated by them with little more than a glance. Is the tatooed body builder hanging out in a bar responsible for their fear?

Is the tattooed body builder allowed to have sex at all?

Scary guy will have to pay extra attention to signals and messages when he's got his lady friend in a corner or in his car by herself.

My heart BLEEDS.

One exception:

I think the Scary Guy thing gets very twisty and complicated in regard to race - because for so many white women dark skin = automatic Scary Guy when statstically she's got a lot less to worry about from anyone besides other white guys, and chances are her butt is puckering over racism pure and simple. Then I question just how much bending over backward Scary Guy has to do.

However if Black Scary Guy is actually Scary Guy AND black, not simply black guy, he kind of has to pay extra attention in the Decent Scary Guy way.

Because RACISM - I can't imagine there's not one black guy who doesn't suffer under this paradigm whether he's physically intimidating or not. Race and gender clusterfuck in a weird way in the elevator.

 

[KoPilot]

Gawd, this is elevatorgate all over again.

 

[Netzach]

Gawd, this is elevatorgate all over again.

Yeah, it is. But it's stupid because we're not talking about rape in an elevator rape. How did we get here? Oh, right, sadface over big guy how not to be rapey with new GF.

 

[KoPilot]

Yeah, it is. But it's stupid because we're not talking about rape in an elevator rape. How did we get here? Oh, right, sadface over big guy how not to be rapey with new GF.

I don't really see the merit in arguing "it's all gray area when you really think about it!" and "slippery slopes ahoy!" because if that's what you want, grats, that's the world you live in already. Thanks for nothing; the pseudo-intellectualism doesn't make it smell less like horseshit.

This convo belongs r/mensrights.

 

[Netzach]

I don't really see the merit in arguing "it's all gray area when you really think about it!" and "slippery slopes ahoy!" because if that's what you want, grats, that's the world you live in already. Thanks for nothing; the pseudo-intellectualism doesn't make it smell less like horseshit.

This convo belongs r/mensrights.

More or less, largely.

I'm sorry if someone has to be extra vigilant and maybe go a night with a dry dick when he could have had some.

 

[KoPilot]

More or less, largely.

I'm sorry if someone has to be extra vigilant and maybe go a night with a dry dick when he could have had some.

#sorrynotsorry

 

[Stella_Omega]

So tattooed body builder MUST be a guy, and the stranger unnerved by his presence MUST be his prospective lady friend. And you're saying that fitness nuts and ink enthusiasts and by extension here any number of other subcultures should just ASSUME they are scary, that there is no place in public where they can be permitted to relax, and you lump it in with the same social travesty that black people must assume they are frightening to white people.

... wow.

Stag, you're doing that thing again.