Wile E. Coyote
Fledgling Freddie
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 96
1/3? Really?
- Thread starter nath
- Start date
Damini
Part of the furniture
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 2,234
And I explained that I meant that in the circumstances we were discussing. Oh dear, burn me at the stake for not having greater clarity even though I've repeatedly explained my position. It's not like we can edit posts anymore.
If you want to keep trying to manufacture an argument, then knock yourself out.
Do you get off an acting like some total cock? I wasn't using that so I can show off my credentials in some fucking PC competition. I was saying it to prove to you, fuck knows why I bothered, that I know from personal experience that rape isn't just a male thing.
If you want to keep trying to manufacture an argument, then knock yourself out.
Do you get off an acting like some total cock? I wasn't using that so I can show off my credentials in some fucking PC competition. I was saying it to prove to you, fuck knows why I bothered, that I know from personal experience that rape isn't just a male thing.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 36,060
Whipped said:She must have been pretty hideous for him not to just lie back and think of England, or Norway
That's exactly the attitude that if you turned it around to women would get you villified.
Reverse the sexes in your sentence and apply it to this:
... said:
...
Tho, if I'm honest and she was pretty, I'd be tempted to do just what you said.
Turamber
Part of the furniture
- Joined
- May 15, 2004
- Messages
- 3,558
Just been reading Melanie Phillips website and thought this would be of interest/some relevance.
"February 25, 2005
Sexual Salem at the Home Office
Once again, I am astonished by the way in which patently flawed research is accepted as authoritative simply because it corresponds with a prevailing prejudice. Research commissioned by the Home Office says rape attacks are going up but convictions are going down. As the Telegraph reported:
'Researchers blamed a "culture of scepticism" towards rape victims among police and prosecutors that had led to a loss of confidence in the system.'
BBC Radio News this morning reported this as the Home Office 'admitting' that rapes were going up while convictions came down. But this is to assume that all claims of rape mean that a rape has actually taken place. It is to assume that rape claims made by women are all true -- a wholly prejudiced assumption that all men accused of rape are guilty unless proved innocent, which has led the government to rig rape trials to achieve more convictions. And which is the department which has led this witch-hunt against men in rape trials? Why, none other than the very same Home Office that commissioned this particular piece of research.
The researchers seem to believe that the 'culture of scepticism' is misplaced. They presumably think this because they believe that all women who cry rape are telling the truth. But how do they know? And why -- if they have actually talked to the police and prosecuting authorities -- do they dismiss their 'scepticism' with such contumely? For although it is undeniably true that such a culture of scepticism certainly exists among police, lawyers and others who routinely deal with such allegations, this is because there are ample grounds for such scepticism. Indeed, there is a view that the majority of rape claims are false.
This view is not plucked out of their air. It arises from incidents where the claim is demonstrably false. Like, for example, the incident where a woman claimed she was sexually attacked in a subway, but the CCTV showed this was utnrue; or where a man was prosecuted (and aquitted) for rape even though the girl had sent him a text message saying her allegation was untrue and she would withdraw it; or where a girl who was being arrested claimed that a police officer had sexually attacked her even though he was observed at all times while he was with her and seen to have done nothing at all; or where DNA evidence shows trhe rape claim to have been false; and on and on.
The police, lobotomised by political correctness and terrified of becoming the object of a witch-hunt, do not generally take action against these women. Instead they pass the buck to the courts. Many men are aquitted becasue they should never have been prosecuted in the first palce. The political climate, in which the government has said in effect over and over again that all male rape defendants are guilty, that any woman who claims rape is telling the truth and that therefore the rate of convictions has to be gerrymandered upwards in a perversion of justice that has - staggeringly -- passed almost without remark, provides a positive encouragement for malevolence and attention seeking, not to mention a more profound confusion about the rules of the dating game and the role of the law in punishing a man for an unsatisfactory sexual encounter.
And before any brainwashed zombie starts screaming that I am trivialising rape, it is this very situation which is doing so. Rape is a terrible crime. And it happens. But its seriousness is grotesquely undermined by this farce which, by exaggerating its incidence and substituting persecution for prosecution, is bringing the very notion of sexual violence against women -- not to mention the law itself -- into disrepute. "
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/2005_02.html
With such an emotive subject as rape one can not help but share personal experiences, which is probably why I brought the issue of "claimed rape" into this thread. If it causes offence then I can only apologise.
I do recognise that people are raped and I find it horrific. I also find the fact that people can claim to have been raped and use it as a weapon equally horrific.
Reading the newspapers it becomes apparent that some women have sexual relations with men whilst they are drunk and of impaired judgement. Is that the same as rape? A number of them claim that it is, but a court has to examine the facts for itself.
To say that it definitely is rape presumes a lot about the man, that he is a sexual predator. Apparently, from the way somebody answered my Devil's Advocate question above, the woman is allowed the excuse that she is drunk but the man is not. There is certainly prejudice and inequality in the way either sex views the other and that is sad and something that needs to be addressed.
"February 25, 2005
Sexual Salem at the Home Office
Once again, I am astonished by the way in which patently flawed research is accepted as authoritative simply because it corresponds with a prevailing prejudice. Research commissioned by the Home Office says rape attacks are going up but convictions are going down. As the Telegraph reported:
'Researchers blamed a "culture of scepticism" towards rape victims among police and prosecutors that had led to a loss of confidence in the system.'
BBC Radio News this morning reported this as the Home Office 'admitting' that rapes were going up while convictions came down. But this is to assume that all claims of rape mean that a rape has actually taken place. It is to assume that rape claims made by women are all true -- a wholly prejudiced assumption that all men accused of rape are guilty unless proved innocent, which has led the government to rig rape trials to achieve more convictions. And which is the department which has led this witch-hunt against men in rape trials? Why, none other than the very same Home Office that commissioned this particular piece of research.
The researchers seem to believe that the 'culture of scepticism' is misplaced. They presumably think this because they believe that all women who cry rape are telling the truth. But how do they know? And why -- if they have actually talked to the police and prosecuting authorities -- do they dismiss their 'scepticism' with such contumely? For although it is undeniably true that such a culture of scepticism certainly exists among police, lawyers and others who routinely deal with such allegations, this is because there are ample grounds for such scepticism. Indeed, there is a view that the majority of rape claims are false.
This view is not plucked out of their air. It arises from incidents where the claim is demonstrably false. Like, for example, the incident where a woman claimed she was sexually attacked in a subway, but the CCTV showed this was utnrue; or where a man was prosecuted (and aquitted) for rape even though the girl had sent him a text message saying her allegation was untrue and she would withdraw it; or where a girl who was being arrested claimed that a police officer had sexually attacked her even though he was observed at all times while he was with her and seen to have done nothing at all; or where DNA evidence shows trhe rape claim to have been false; and on and on.
The police, lobotomised by political correctness and terrified of becoming the object of a witch-hunt, do not generally take action against these women. Instead they pass the buck to the courts. Many men are aquitted becasue they should never have been prosecuted in the first palce. The political climate, in which the government has said in effect over and over again that all male rape defendants are guilty, that any woman who claims rape is telling the truth and that therefore the rate of convictions has to be gerrymandered upwards in a perversion of justice that has - staggeringly -- passed almost without remark, provides a positive encouragement for malevolence and attention seeking, not to mention a more profound confusion about the rules of the dating game and the role of the law in punishing a man for an unsatisfactory sexual encounter.
And before any brainwashed zombie starts screaming that I am trivialising rape, it is this very situation which is doing so. Rape is a terrible crime. And it happens. But its seriousness is grotesquely undermined by this farce which, by exaggerating its incidence and substituting persecution for prosecution, is bringing the very notion of sexual violence against women -- not to mention the law itself -- into disrepute. "
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/2005_02.html
With such an emotive subject as rape one can not help but share personal experiences, which is probably why I brought the issue of "claimed rape" into this thread. If it causes offence then I can only apologise.
I do recognise that people are raped and I find it horrific. I also find the fact that people can claim to have been raped and use it as a weapon equally horrific.
Reading the newspapers it becomes apparent that some women have sexual relations with men whilst they are drunk and of impaired judgement. Is that the same as rape? A number of them claim that it is, but a court has to examine the facts for itself.
To say that it definitely is rape presumes a lot about the man, that he is a sexual predator. Apparently, from the way somebody answered my Devil's Advocate question above, the woman is allowed the excuse that she is drunk but the man is not. There is certainly prejudice and inequality in the way either sex views the other and that is sad and something that needs to be addressed.
maxi said:
Uhhhh no, no i'm not.
I'm not a forum fanboi with a reputation to protect - if I have something disagreeable or unpleasant to say that people don't like then I will say it and if I thought that woman asked for it then I would say that woman asked for it.
As it stands I don't and I didn't.
I said that NOBODY deserves to go through the humiliating experience of being raped and I stand by that, but what I *DID* say is that many woman aren't as careful about their own health and safety as they perhaps should be and go as far as to actively put themselves into situations where their personal safety is already compromised to an extent.
nath
Fledgling Freddie
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 8,009
- Thread starter
- #73
I think the issue maxi has and I actually agree with it is that it's fairly telling that so many people here tend to be quick to say "yeah rape is very bad - but blahblah". I remember hearing a teacher at school say "yes he gets bullied an awful lot, but he does bring it on himself to a certain extent". Bullying is a two way process but it says something that that's the initial response. There may be nothing incorrect about the statements being said but the context in which they're said says a lot about the people saying them.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 36,060
nath said:
Actually nath m8 - I think it's the other way round.
People are quick to jump on blokes who, IMHO, rightly say that "rape is bad, in no way a woman's fault but if women want to lessen the risk of being raped then there are lifestyle changes that can be made".
Because those lifestyle changes involve being more conservative in some ways, and because they will actually mean having less fun they mean that any bloke who says it gets jumped on by hysterical masses who've missed the point completely.
Kinda like what's happened in this thread.
Sharma
Can't get enough of FH
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,679
Scouse said:
Although I havent read far beyond this post i'd like to add something about that.
A girl I knew at school was raped when she had just turned 16 and abused the fact that she looked 18 and go into a club after getting shitfaced on Booze, she had purposely started flirting with 2 lads with intent shit-stir to start a fight for the fun of it. So it broke out, couple of lads battering each other in your usual drunken manner and thrown out of the club.
30 minutes later she goes out to get a taxi, one of the former blokes caught her dragged her away and had his way with her.
Now i'm curious, who's fault would it be for the cause of the rape? Hers or the offender?
Anar
One of Freddy's beloved
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Messages
- 193
Damini said:
Seems the law agrees.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/4464402.stm
Theres been some intresting and valid points (been some silly ones as well
) and thought id bring this news story to your attention.
Turamber
Part of the furniture
- Joined
- May 15, 2004
- Messages
- 3,558
Thats a terrible, terrible case Anar. The police should never have prosecuted the person involved - it seems quite clear that there was insufficient evidence from the beginning.
The police have been getting criticism from a number of quarters that only a small percentage of rape cases are going to court and a low percentage of those obtaining a conviction. Statistics should *never* replace evidence however, no matter how repulsive the alleged crime.
The police have been getting criticism from a number of quarters that only a small percentage of rape cases are going to court and a low percentage of those obtaining a conviction. Statistics should *never* replace evidence however, no matter how repulsive the alleged crime.
DaGaffer
Down With That Sorta Thing
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 18,410
Anar said:Seems the law agrees.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/4464402.stm
Theres been some intresting and valid points (been some silly ones as well
Thing is, how many people reading about that case are thinking "he probably got away with it" rather than he's actually innocent? He'll have to live with that veil of suspicion for the rest of his life, which is why I think both parties should have the protection of anonymity until after a guilty verdict.
old.Tohtori
FH is my second home
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2004
- Messages
- 45,210
Anar said:Seems the law agrees.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/4464402.stm
Theres been some intresting and valid points (been some silly ones as well
There's also the fact that the guy said "we had sex" after which point it was brought to "rape" status.
If the guy really raped her, he would have said "Oh nothing happened, i tried to get her room key to get her inside, but she was too drunk to manage this."
Atleast, that's how i would see it. Unless the guy is a really really cunning rapist or stupid as f*cknuts on a x-mas tree.
Will
/bin/su
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2003
- Messages
- 5,259
I think that case gives out a dangerous message as it has been reported. I've not seen the case itself, but the way it has been reported is that if a woman cannot remember not giving consent, that is as good as having actually giving consent. Which is scary.
DaGaffer
Down With That Sorta Thing
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 18,410
old.Tohtori said:
I don't think he'd have to be that cunning tbh. With the risk of DNA evidence etc. or even eyewitnesses, he'd be more stupid to deny having sex if he'd actually done so. Because of the presumption of innocence in law, all his lawyer had to do was throw doubt on her (lack of) consent. The fact that she was too pissed to know what she did only helped his case. Which was sort-of where this whole discussion started wasn't it?
old.Tohtori
FH is my second home
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2004
- Messages
- 45,210
This is a problem for sure.
Hopefully, the legal system doesn't change into the "if she's drunk enough not to remember, have your way with her" bull.
As it is, there's shit all that can be done.
Hopefully, the legal system doesn't change into the "if she's drunk enough not to remember, have your way with her" bull.
As it is, there's shit all that can be done.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 36,060
Will said:
Comes back to that word responsibility Will.
If she's not responsible enough to look after herself then what are we supposed to do? Lock men up on the off chance that they "may" be guilty.
I could have been that man. I've been with women at Uni who were so battered they couldn't remember a thing of the night before.
When you're with them you don't realise this. You're pretty drunk yourself. But all it takes is one of them to decide that they don't actually like you in the morning.
Isn't that just as scary? It'd ruin your life. You'd lose many of your mates. Women would be mistrustful of you. I'd be tempted to emigrate.
Senior lawyers have come out and said that they're concerned about the government's stance on rape law. Lets listen to the experts eh?
Will
/bin/su
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2003
- Messages
- 5,259
You might not have read the case. She got really drunk at a party. Her mates decided she needed to be walked home, and they picked the man later accused of raping her.
All she remembered was looking for her keys, and then later lying on the floor inside. A Uni counsellor spoke to Mr Dougal, who said they had consensual sex, which was the first she knew of it. She honestly admitted she had no recollection of the events.
No matter what actually happened, there are a few things here. If a girl is that minging, is she in a mental state to give consent? The judge said yes, which means future cases will have to take this into account. His exact words "Drunken consent is still consent". I don't agree with this, but I'm not a lawyer or a judge.
The case does not cover how drunk he was. If he was sober, which I doubt, it would be clearcut that, while not a rapist, he's a scumbag for having sex with someone that drunk. If he was pissed too, that could partially explain what happened, but that detail was glossed over in the papers.
And I'd be very careful who I let walk my mates home in future.
All she remembered was looking for her keys, and then later lying on the floor inside. A Uni counsellor spoke to Mr Dougal, who said they had consensual sex, which was the first she knew of it. She honestly admitted she had no recollection of the events.
No matter what actually happened, there are a few things here. If a girl is that minging, is she in a mental state to give consent? The judge said yes, which means future cases will have to take this into account. His exact words "Drunken consent is still consent". I don't agree with this, but I'm not a lawyer or a judge.
The case does not cover how drunk he was. If he was sober, which I doubt, it would be clearcut that, while not a rapist, he's a scumbag for having sex with someone that drunk. If he was pissed too, that could partially explain what happened, but that detail was glossed over in the papers.
And I'd be very careful who I let walk my mates home in future.
old.Tohtori
FH is my second home
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2004
- Messages
- 45,210
If i read correctly, the guy was campus security or something...*goes check*
Ah yes:
"She became ill and a member of staff asked Mr Dougal, who was working as a security guard, to walk her home."
I'd say that he's a "reliable" escort. Kinda like, kinda, asking a cop to take you home.
Albeit, if a security guard is drunk, it's not much of a difference.
If he indeed was sober, since the staff member DID ask him(which would make me assume he was in sober enoiugh condition), he's just a scumbag who took advantage of a girl who might have wanted, in her drunken state, shag a copper.
Just my two cent...on two cents.
Ah yes:
"She became ill and a member of staff asked Mr Dougal, who was working as a security guard, to walk her home."
I'd say that he's a "reliable" escort. Kinda like, kinda, asking a cop to take you home.
Albeit, if a security guard is drunk, it's not much of a difference.
If he indeed was sober, since the staff member DID ask him(which would make me assume he was in sober enoiugh condition), he's just a scumbag who took advantage of a girl who might have wanted, in her drunken state, shag a copper.
Just my two cent...on two cents.
