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

[Stella_Omega]

Jesus keerist.

If a woman wakes up next to a man and wonders why she slept with him, that's her wondering why she made that decision.

If she leaves knowing that she slept with him because she was afraid to say no, or because he wouldn't stop pestering her until she stopped saying no -- that just might be rape.

I'm already getting the fallout from yesterday, just as I predicted. But some of them have changed their tone already. One of them even backed me up immediately. When I talk about this, though, I can't call my stance feminism, because that word instantly closes their ears and their hearts. They've heard people shame men before. So instead I call it humanism, which is actually a completely different philosophy i'm having to research more into. My understanding is that social justice as it concerns rape is important to humanists, but does not seem to be as huge on their radar.

That's your privilege, right there. Talk to men, call it anything you want. I don't have that luxury.

Of course not. I've got my front, you've got yours. I'm not even saying my "activism" is more important. It's almost certainly not, but it is just important enough that you absolutely need more of it.

That's what's called the front lines. You are absolutely doing something important, and congratulations, because it's something you can do for a cause that you believe in. And I can't do that.

Primalex obviously thinks this is an important issue. He's still trying to comment, even as you shut him down without listening. He gets my kudos for still being here, if nothing else, because the TONE is not one that is conducive to conversation with the people that REALLY NEED TO HEAR IT.

What do you think is important to Primalex about the issue? What do you think he's trying to say? Do you really think he's trying to talk in good faith?

And how many Primalexes do I need to cater to in my life? How many men's hurt feelings am I supposed to be responsible for?

Maybe you can talk to Primalex.

In the system we have now, If you want to apply rape fairly to "lesser instances" (lesser than forcible rape) you have to be willing to take the mind blowing step of making rape less of a crime, and never ever allowing the assault and battery portion of the charge to slide as it occasionally does now. Thats not a solution i'm willing to back , if only because the system we have now is already so broken.

Well, maybe we can call "forcible rape" "forcible rape." And coercive rape, could be called "coercive rape." and assumptive rape, could be called "assumptive rape."

The problem with refusing to acknowledge that these things are rape as well as the violent version that we can all recognise, is that it trivialises those crimes, and allows a culture to deny them.

I never wanted to have sex with her but somehow it ended up happening. Rape?

Yeah, actually. Congratulations, you might have joined the ranks. You might not be bothered much, or at all. It might not have happened in an atmosphere of fear or coersion, because you might be twice her size and it might never have occurred to you to feel afraid of saying no. But someone thought it would be a great idea to incapacitate you so they could fuck you.

How about that.

 

[njlauren]

Having regrets the next day, what guys call beer goggles or what is known as coyote ugly (i.e someone so ugly, you would chew your arm off to get away like a coyote in a trap), is not the same thing as rape, regret does not equal rape, though sadly some people have been known to cry rape after having sex and feeling guilty about it on moral grounds or whatever......It would be rape if you were totally out of it and can't remember what happened and they took advantage of you or if you otherwise couldn't stop them, or if you were drugged or something, but having regrets cause the person in the morning appears hideous is not rape to me...and not remembering doesn't mean you weren't willing at the time, though that raises the question about when is someone drunk enough that they can't consent? Obviously, if someone is passed out, they can't, but what if someone is way drunk but is a willing participant, but can't remember it? Is that rape? Can we expect someone to know if someone is too drunk? It isn't so cut and dried IMO.

I think the answer to the original question for me would be in what happened. If the person overpowered the other person because they wanted sex, if they had sex with someone who was unconscious or non responsive, I would be repulsed and would probably tell the person to take a hike. If it was a borderline case where at the time he/she thought it was okay, they were both drunk but then then next day felt like they have have taken advantage of the other person, I would be a lot more willing to forgive them if it was in a gray area, where it wasn't so clear, if they thought they had the green light and realized later the person was in la la land, it is very different (friend of mine dated a girl who had been drinking, and unknown to him she also was taking some kind of med you aren't supposed to drink when taking, and in effect she was in a state where she couldn't really be said to be in control of her actions, later on he realized he had taken advantage of her without meaning to, he thought it was just drunken sex,and felt like shit....he confessed to the girl, and even was thinking of turning himself in, but she told him it wasn't his fault entirely, that she screwed up drinking like that and she understood it was not intentional....it technically could be considered rape, but she didn't consider it so, and was actually touched he cared enough to make sure she was okay, offered to get her help, and didn't see her as a drunken slut which she admitted she prob acted like.....so in that case, I wouldn't be so judgemental because it was on the edge.

 

[Stella_Omega]

he confessed to the girl, and even was thinking of turning himself in

yeah, see? He's re-defined the word, and the world is a little bit better for that.

The thing is-- forgiving and understanding a mistake is much much easier when the person understands that there is something that needs to be forgiven.

 

[Netzach]

Well, maybe we can call "forcible rape" "forcible rape." And coercive rape, could be called "coercive rape." and assumptive rape, could be called "assumptive rape."

The problem with refusing to acknowledge that these things are rape as well as the violent version that we can all recognise, is that it trivialises those crimes, and allows a culture to deny them.

We live in a society that already trivializes to the point of erasure - videotaped rapes of underage girls and the violent sodomizing of immigrant suspects by police.

 

[Stella_Omega]

We live in a society that already trivializes to the point of erasure - videotaped rapes of underage girls and the violent sodomizing of immigrant suspects by police.

This.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Prying into your opinion on technicalities; do you feel assumptive rape would be a misdemeanor, or a felony as the others would be? would it require sex offender registry? In what way would it be treated as less severe than coercive rape?

Good Questions!

I doubt that assumptive rape would be treated as a felony, But it needs to be put into the same spectrum, for the sake of our culture. Similarly, involuntary manslaughter is widely agreed to be not murder, but you made someone be dead, and msot people manage to feel pretty bad about it. Or buying something that turns out to be stolen property. You usually don't get to keep it.

Most of primalex's arguments and attempts at probing questions do make sense to me though. It has helped me focus my own points a little (which I can tell isn't saying much)

Yes, at times trolls are helpful that way. But take it from me, they stop being helpful that way after a while-- how many times will you want to stop a discussion among your peers to explain kindergarten concepts to some entitled and antagonistic asshole-- especially one that you know damn well does not want to listen because you've dealt with that person for years now?

So, thank you primalex, and that's not meant to be condescending.

I'm done trying to translate for anyone though.

have you translated for Primalex? That would be a fantastic help.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I have tried translating for one clearly misunderstood individual or another before on several occasions.

My thanks at best is "don't put words in my mouth."

Hopefully my lesson has been learned by now.

I was more thinking of you translating TO Primalex, maybe answering his questions. You might be the right man for the job.

 

[BrightlyGo]

Booze seems to enter into this discussion a lot.

It's true that your decision-making abilities are impaired when you're drunk. However, you know that, and if you make the decision to drink, you should still take responsibility for what you did while drunk. i should hope its obvious that shouldn't apply when someone is slipped a mickey, served stronger drinks than they agreed to, or tricked or coerced into becoming intoxicated.

Drunk driving is a good example: before you start drinking, you pick a designated driver who won't drink, or give your keys to someone responsible.

 

[Stella_Omega]

yes.

And if you want to get stinking drunk and not remember the fuck afterwards-- if that's what you want to do, and some people have a fetish for it-- then it's equally wise to find your designated fucker before you start the evening.

Of course that means that 'yes' has to mean 'yes' in women's minds. A little practice wouldn't hurt.

 

[Felonious1]

Super interesting. If this is rape, than I've been raped many times. Not just because I slept with a girl that I woke up to regret, but add in that she was the one who got me drunk, arranged the situation so that we would be alone at the right time, etc. etc.

I never wanted to have sex with her but somehow it ended up happening. Rape?

Unless you were roofied, otherwise drugged, or the drink strength was misrepresented to you......you're responsible for your level of intoxication. Life decisions align one's destiny. Even if that life decision means getting drunk and sport fucking a random.

As far as you being raped in said scenario above? Negative. Seemingly not possible. The power is viewed as being with the one wielding the penis. Can't rape the willing horny male. If a man's not too drunk to get it up and have seemingly consensual sex. He knows what he's doing. Right?

However.......for the sake of gender-biased perception differences in such a scenario, lets reverse the roles. I.E. a female has an intoxicated sexual escapade with a male companion who plied her with alcohol. Then she has post-sex regrets the morning after?

Most of mainstream society will see a female in such a scenario as bring taken advantage of to some degree, if not out right raped. The male typically gets the blame after he purposely aided her in getting impaired in order to lower her inhibitions. Plus it limited her ability to verbally or physically resist his advances.

Contextual differences, details, motives and gender come into play in blame/responsibility placement of either scenario. Of course its a subjective determination......but putting a male in the pseudo power position changes how its viewed by most onlookers.

Back to the power of the penis conundrum again. Who's right? Who's wrong? Who's the victim? Who's been victimized?

Who's to say?

Certainly not me........as I've been on both sides of the ugly coin.

 

[Netzach]

What if the word "abuse" were taken more seriously. In my version of utopian candy land it would be.

I don't think you can argue that this scenario isn't abuse - it's clear cut that it is. I think that the person it happened to gets to frame it for himself (always always always) but it's good to realize that it has different characteristics because of the assigned statuses of people involved. Put the setting into an institution with the woman in a power position over the man and it changes.

Why can't we save "rape" for violence/limitation of movement/clear cut physical inability to consent + penetration, and make abuse also, in theory anyway, unacceptable?

Seeing as rape is still more or less acceptable as I've defined it, this is all theory.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Well, there you go.

As long as our culture totally equates sticking it in with power and sucking it up with passivity, men will deny that their own "no' can be ignored.


Especially nowadays with Viagra and shit like that.

 

[Felonious1]

Another post laying the responsibility on the victim. There is a good reason why our culture is a patriarchy and always has been: give a man and woman a club each and the man wins ( and please don't start quoting exceptions ) Nature has shaped our culture and man has been more than happy to accept it, even trumpet it as the reason they are 'superior'. To start blaming victims for having grown up in that culture doesn't help much. For every brought-it-on-themselves victim there is a I-couldn't-help-myself-I-blame-society aggressor. Lets address the cause not the effect.

What I posted was an example of some of the unhealthy, previously-programmed mindsets some people hold to be their personal truths. A way of thinking that has a direct affect on their actions/inaction, especially under pressured attack and being manipulated into X,Y or Z. Which makes them more likely to be noticed, singled out and victimized by a potential abuser/rapist.

Based on the premise that if you can change how one thinks, then you've changed how one feels and ultimately how they behave........I take the following stance.

What I try to change is how a potential victim, which we all are to some degree, can learn to protect themselves be being taught to stand up for their rights and protect themselves physically and/or emotionally. From outlining the typical mindset of a boorish abuser, thus elevating one's social intelligence.......to preaching personal safety by controlling one's environment and/or exercising our 2nd amendment gun ownership rights here in the USA. ..........I do my part to keep the ones I care about safe.

That's how I address the situation that many will face when they encounter a potential abuser or rapist. Plus, I'm in hopes my previous posts on the subject mater will enlighten some to the fact that they're NOT powerless to resist unwanted advances. As well as well within their rights to do so.

No one can plug in the lack-of-empathy port in a flawed humans's mental schematic so they'll instantly have a conscious to guide their decisions. No more can they unplug the self-entitled mental port in order to prevent them from feeling they have the right to mistreat and violate someone else's rights. Toxic and flawed is as they do. That won't change. Thus they're a waste of time and energy to even attempt to swaying into bring decent humans who wouldn't harm others for their amusement and demonic entertainment.



Felonious

 

[Netzach]

Well, there you go.

As long as our culture totally equates sticking it in with power and sucking it up with passivity, men will deny that their own "no' can be ignored.


Especially nowadays with Viagra and shit like that.

What do you think the ratios of passed out man viagra rapes are to prison rapes? Cop-with-plunger rapes? EVERY one of these is under-reported so under-reported factors into what we know.

I know the temptation to re-frame penetration is strong, but I don't understand why it has to happen here. I don't think it's going to get re-coded in the hive-mind of the world simply because I may not see it like that.

We're completely de-sensitized to the concept of abuse, I guess. Why is it that "abuse" carries no real weight or serious response?

It should. It must. But God forbid everything doesn't get treated identically. Why wouldn't a NON identical response be better for a specific problem?

 

[njlauren]

Well, there you go.

As long as our culture totally equates sticking it in with power and sucking it up with passivity, men will deny that their own "no' can be ignored.


Especially nowadays with Viagra and shit like that.

Viagra and cialis have a lot of myths associated with them, but I doubt they would allow a women to rape a man by giving him one and then riding his now engorged cock. Viagra and the like block an anti erection enzyme that causes blood to drain from the cock, so it can stop them from failing to get hard when aroused..but the thing is, the man has to get aroused for it to work, it does't arouse him, simply keeps the cock hard when aroused. If a guy has a knife to his neck or the women ties him up, if the arousal response isn't triggered, a ton of viagra wouldn't cause him to get it up. Obviously, the rapist might be able to stroke his cock and it could react to that, but if he is in distress it is pretty common it would stay limp.viagra or non. I have used viagra, and much of what they say on the commercials is marketing, including the warning that you may get a 4 hour erection

 

[Stella_Omega]

Viagra and cialis have a lot of myths associated with them, but I doubt they would allow a women to rape a man by giving him one and then riding his now engorged cock. Viagra and the like block an anti erection enzyme that causes blood to drain from the cock, so it can stop them from failing to get hard when aroused..but the thing is, the man has to get aroused for it to work, it does't arouse him, simply keeps the cock hard when aroused. If a guy has a knife to his neck or the women ties him up, if the arousal response isn't triggered, a ton of viagra wouldn't cause him to get it up. Obviously, the rapist might be able to stroke his cock and it could react to that, but if he is in distress it is pretty common it would stay limp.viagra or non. I have used viagra, and much of what they say on the commercials is marketing, including the warning that you may get a 4 hour erection

Thanks, Lauren, that's good info, I appreciate it.

 

[Marquis]

Unless you were roofied, otherwise drugged, or the drink strength was misrepresented to you......you're responsible for your level of intoxication. Life decisions align one's destiny. Even if that life decision means getting drunk and sport fucking a random.

As far as you being raped in said scenario above? Negative. Seemingly not possible. The power is viewed as being with the one wielding the penis. Can't rape the willing horny male. If a man's not too drunk to get it up and have seemingly consensual sex. He knows what he's doing. Right?

However.......for the sake of gender-biased perception differences in such a scenario, lets reverse the roles. I.E. a female has an intoxicated sexual escapade with a male companion who plied her with alcohol. Then she has post-sex regrets the morning after?

Most of mainstream society will see a female in such a scenario as bring taken advantage of to some degree, if not out right raped. The male typically gets the blame after he purposely aided her in getting impaired in order to lower her inhibitions. Plus it limited her ability to verbally or physically resist his advances.

Contextual differences, details, motives and gender come into play in blame/responsibility placement of either scenario. Of course its a subjective determination......but putting a male in the pseudo power position changes how its viewed by most onlookers.

Back to the power of the penis conundrum again. Who's right? Who's wrong? Who's the victim? Who's been victimized?

Who's to say?

Certainly not me........as I've been on both sides of the ugly coin.

This is a really interesting post.

I can tell you certainly that I would NOT have had sex with her while I was sober, and I said "NO" quite clearly to her advances many times throughout the night, although obviously eventually I gave in.

I didn't consider how similar this is to the rape scenario presented earlier.

 

[Netzach]

This part didn't sink in whatsoever.

Why is it that "abuse" carries no real weight or serious response?

Why is it that "abuse" carries no real weight or serious response?

Why is it that "abuse" carries no real weight or serious response?

NO ambiguity. Plenty of everyone raping everyone permutations, no opportunities to make any decisions to stay or go. No "was it really?" People we simply have systematically decided are not humans, and there seem to be a hell of a lot of them.

If your give a fuck isn't broken, if your give a fuck extends past your own personal space, maybe this is a problem to you.

http://www.justdetention.org

 

[Primalex]

Why is it that "abuse" carries no real weight or serious response?

What exactly do you consider a serious response?

Do we lack a "serious response" when a 6 year old is charged with first-degree sexual assault?

Do we lack a "serious response" when a guy has sex with his girlfriend three weeks before her age of consent, gets registered as sex offender and then killed by an anti-rape fanatic?

 

[njlauren]

In reverse order;

The mythological 4 hour viagra erection is a MEDICAL EMERGENCY!

Its a side effect thats just common enough they have to mention it, but sounds cool enough they practically use it as a selling point.

And you have one measely concedable point; you can't slip a man a viagra and ride him without foreplay, let alone beat him into submission with a tire iron and then rape him engulfingly. One would assume the stress, trauma, shock, and blood loss would prevent the "necessary" erection. Except that it doesn't. I remember Post traumatic sex being a dangerous fad talked about in my colledge years; young people were intentionally wrecking stolen cars just so they could have sex though the shock/ adrenaline high. Blood loss doesn't halt erections, the two in combination hasten blackouts. So slipping a man a viagra and beating him with a tire iron might actually do the trick for some guys.

Furthermore; an erection is not something that can be summoned or dispelled by sheer force of will. Any 14 year old boy knows this. There is such thing as vibrators. Even without vibrators, it is entirely possible for a man to say no, and mean it, and still be aroused. Especially if a little restraint is something he might enjoy when consenting. A boner does not equal consent.

I am so blessed that everyone believes I can only be forcibly raped analy.

Once again, there is such thing as vibrator. And broom handles if that's not handy, a penis is not strictly necessary for penetrative rape.

Oh wait I have a tongue too, and a knife might compell me not to bite so much. Or more if so desired. Its such a common fetish, you can't have missed it; is forced oral not rape in your book?

So women might have to go a little outside the missionary position to forcibly rape men. That's all you've actually got, but with that you've managed to set back our conversation days. no. Decades.

Female rape does happen, but it is rare, you can claim it is being lied up, underreported, but the reality is that it happens a small fraction of the time compared to male on female, in part because rape is a crime of rage and hate, and women while they can hate, don't process it the same way men do. When men rape for the most part it is about power and showing anger and disrespect, it isn't about lust or getting their rocks off, they have problems with women, and are using rape to express it. When those gems in Ohio sexually assaulted the girl who was out of it, they used their fingers and videotaped her being assaulted, it was mean to shame her, to violate her and show other people what they thought of her, it wasn't innocent at all, it wasn't like they had sex with her, got their rocks off, they assaulted her.

Erections can be involuntary, but the point is that pumping a guy up with viagra won't necessarily give him an erection the way the mythical stories have them saying, including the erection that won't go down. Yes, having an erection more than 4 hours could potentially happen, but I asked my doctor about that, and he said in the literature there are literally a handful of cases of this happening, among the many millions of men who have been using it, which is why I said it was really a marketing ploy (on the other hand, dryness of mouth, headaches, swelling of the tongue or nasal passages are pretty common).

My point was simply that it may not be that easy to get a man hard and have him keep it when coerced like that, the reactions you are talking about were from people seeking that high (autoeroric asphyxiation is a variation on that), which is different then someone pointing a gun at your head for real.

And yes, a woman could rape a man by using a strap on on him, a broomstick, or could face sit on him ad have him give her orgasms. Any kind of sexual activity that is forced is rape, and that is the point of all this, or is the person cannot consent.

Rape is rape, but I also think pointing out a male being raped by a woman doesn't prove anything, it doesn't answer women being raped by men, nor does it address the very real statistic that men are overwhelmingly a lot more likely to rape someone else than a women would, and a lot more men are raped by men each year than by women...and there is also the little fact that rape doesn't always involved weapons, a lot of the time it is one person physically overpowering the other one, and in that regards, lot easier for a man to do it to a woman than the other way around.

For rapes that are date rape type scenarios, going too far, which are part of the mix, most of that is going to be men, if for the simply fact that it is a lot easier for women to get sex if they want it, they usually don't have to resort to violence or drugs to get a guy to have sex with them, whereas there are a lot of men who have a hard time with women, get horny, and then will go over the edge, use drugs or force, to get what they want (this is again guys going over the line versus the ones doing it to hurt and humiliate women).

 

[stickygirl]

In reverse order;

The mythological 4 hour viagra erection is a MEDICAL EMERGENCY!

.....

So women might have to go a little outside the missionary position to forcibly rape men. That's all you've actually got, but with that you've managed to set back our conversation days. no. Decades.

What is it you're trying to tell us with all this hate Stag?? Do you see any posts here which disagree that technically, a woman can rape a man? Is this an issue you have about women in general because of something that happened to you? If it is, then you are still in a very traumatised state and you need to find some proper counselling if you can, not get yourself angered by posting here. All that anger is gonna eat you up

 

[xxxLunaxxx]

Booze seems to enter into this discussion a lot.

It's true that your decision-making abilities are impaired when you're drunk. However, you know that, and if you make the decision to drink, you should still take responsibility for what you did while drunk. i should hope its obvious that shouldn't apply when someone is slipped a mickey, served stronger drinks than they agreed to, or tricked or coerced into becoming intoxicated.

Drunk driving is a good example: before you start drinking, you pick a designated driver who won't drink, or give your keys to someone responsible.

I don't agree with this. A drunk driver has to take responsibility because they actually got behind the wheel and drove. The laws around that are seriously lacking too, in my opinion.

Someone who is raped is not the responsible party. It sounds like you are implying that if someone gets drunk, it is their fault if they get raped. Is that what you are saying?

I will say I have struggled with these thoughts over the years due to my own experience with rape. If both people are intoxicated, and one says no, I still believe it is rape. But how strongly can you blame the drunk person who rapes you when their facilities are limited by alcohol? If we blame and prosecute them for getting behind the wheel and driving, then shouldn't we be able to blame and prosecute them for rape? Sometimes I am not sure where I stand on this. Some days I blame the man who raped me, and some days I think we were both fucked up and didn't know what was happening. Although even drunk and saying no I knew what was happening, so shouldn't he have known?

 

[stickygirl]

Exactly ^^ It's what called rape culture: read up on it. It's not like a man can penetrate by accident ( though someone here will no doubt try to prove it ). The rapist is doing it for his own satisfaction, not the other persons. They might not even realise they are a rapist until either they sober up or the victim accuses them - that's why education is so important: people have to be told what rape is. If a girl is so drunk she can't resist, then the man has to go through a mental process "I'm gonna fuck her - looks like she's out of it, too bad - I'm gonna have some fun..."

This isn't my idea of what sex is supposed to be - it is rape. If the guy later protests impaired lack of judgement then let the judge decide the severity of the punishment. Part of the scar left on the victim was not having the crime acknowledged, so quite apart from the flash-backs and/or physical injury, there is the underlying anger, guilt and shame. "Should I have reported it? What will my family friends think of me if I do ( after all I didn't get my teeth busted so it can't have been that bad )? Why did I get so drunk? Will anyone believe me?"

 

[Bramblethorn]

Booze seems to enter into this discussion a lot.

It's true that your decision-making abilities are impaired when you're drunk. However, you know that, and if you make the decision to drink, you should still take responsibility for what you did while drunk. i should hope its obvious that shouldn't apply when someone is slipped a mickey, served stronger drinks than they agreed to, or tricked or coerced into becoming intoxicated.

Drunk driving is a good example: before you start drinking, you pick a designated driver who won't drink, or give your keys to someone responsible.

In general, I have a moral obligation not to impose harm/risk of harm on other people without their consent. Drunk driving obviously violates that obligation.

I do not have a moral obligation to protect myself against harm caused by other people. It would certainly be prudent, and it's something I try to do when possible - I lock doors, use secure passwords, keep my wallet out of sight, etc etc. But acting 100% risk-averse in all situations wouldn't be much of a life. We all do things that increase our personal risk levels, whether it's getting drunk in company or getting into relationships or just stepping out the door without a helmet and an armed escort. It still doesn't give anybody else license to take advantage of that.

 

[Marquis]

This part didn't sink in whatsoever.

Why is it that "abuse" carries no real weight or serious response?

Why is it that "abuse" carries no real weight or serious response?

Why is it that "abuse" carries no real weight or serious response?

NO ambiguity. Plenty of everyone raping everyone permutations, no opportunities to make any decisions to stay or go. No "was it really?" People we simply have systematically decided are not humans, and there seem to be a hell of a lot of them.

If your give a fuck isn't broken, if your give a fuck extends past your own personal space, maybe this is a problem to you.

http://www.justdetention.org

Sorry Netz, I'm not too clear on what you're saying here. Give it another go?