Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

Little girls that cry rape are badFollow

#1 Aug 17 2005 at 3:44 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
5,371 posts
Linky

Link might not work:

Quote:
Our son, a malicious girl and rape that never was
When Jamie, 13, was accused of rape by a 15-year-old girl, the police arrested him and subjected him to a tough, frightening interview. Four days later the girl retracted her allegation and the case was dropped. Jamie’s father, asks why the police displayed no insight into the minds of teenagers before locking his son in a cell

SIX O’CLOCK on a Monday night. A knock on the door. On the step: two detective constables. They show their identification, and ask if they can step inside for a moment to talk to our 13-year-old son, Jamie (not his real name). One of the officers asks: “Are you Jamie Sutton?” He says yes. The officer says: “Jamie Sutton, I am arresting you on suspicion of rape . . .” and reads him his rights.

It was as if someone had driven a tank through the wall. We thought of rape: a violent, aggressive, deviant sexual assault on a vulnerable stranger, on wasteland, in woods, in the back of a van. We looked at our son: a big lad who finds it difficult to conform, but shambling, affable, well-liked, articulate and sensitive. We knew that the charge must be untrue. We were bewildered and scared, and we panicked. We both instinctively foresaw the worst, with cinematic clarity — a miscarriage of justice, imprisonment, and our child irrevocably damaged. Maybe even dead.

My partner and I have always had a hazy, unfocused but generally benign vision of Jamie’s future. Suddenly that collapsed, replaced by a hard-edged image of years of brief contact over a grey utilitarian table in a bleak prison visiting room. In retrospect, it sounds like a pathetic over-reaction. But when the CID enters your home and alleges something so serious, reason deserts you.

Jamie was put in the back of an unmarked car and driven from our small rural town to a police station 14 miles away for questioning. My partner accompanied him. He was put into an adult cell (“He’s a big lad, isn’t he?” they said), then interviewed for 90 minutes. Jamie recalls the fear he felt: here he was in a bleak room with a tape recorder, a solicitor, and two officers playing hard cop/soft cop. He thought of how rapists, murderers and robbers had sat where he sat now. And he hadn’t a clue why he was there.

If he’d been aware of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (implemented in May 2004) he might have had some inkling. We had never heard of it; you probably haven’t either. The Act changed the definition of rape. “Rape” is now any act of non-consensual penetration — oral, **** or vaginal. Previously, it covered non-consensual **** or vaginal penetration. It might not sound immediately significant to you: it was to Jamie and to us.

Jamie was facing interrogation as a “suspected rapist” because he had met Sarah, 15, whom he knew from school, with a group of her friends in a local park. They did what teenagers do in that fumbling, experimental, exploratory way. She was very drunk, she offered him oral sex, he accepted, the deed was inexpertly done, the two walked back across the park to re-join the rest of the group, and Jamie returned home.

What had happened was a simple excursion into the practical side of **** education that schools don’t teach: something that can be learnt only through experience. You did it, I did it. It is what thousands of teenagers have done, and always will do. It happens every night. Only the most blinkered, ignorant Middle-Englander would consider it an extraordinary occurrence. Two days later, Sarah reported the incident as a sexual assault. The police knew better: this was rape.

As Jamie’s rights were read again and the tape rolled, the detectives probed into the most intimate sexual details relating to the incident and Jamie’s past experience. His mother and the solicitor intervened as the police laid on emotional pressure. They asked him to speculate on whether she was a virgin, to speculate on how her parents would have felt when faced with the situation. Finally, they asked — gratuitously: “If you had a sister, and she related this to you, how would you feel and what would you do?” Yes, well, what would you do?

Jamie mildly told them that he would make absolutely sure that the accusation was founded in fact before doing anything at all. Then he would stop and think. It was mature advice in response to a wholly unreasonable question. Maybe these officers should have taken note.

Throughout the interview, our son answered the officers quietly, articulately, and with self-control. Looking back and listening to the tape, we are proud of him, but to have our pride in our son’s strength and resolve confirmed in such appalling circumstances is bitterly painful.

Jamie and his mother returned home, emotionally and physically shattered. Together, while images of prison cells still haunted us, we fought to pull this back to the essentials: one park, two teenagers, some sexual experimentation, full stop.

Jamie insisted on attending school: he had nothing to hide. The girl also attended school, seemingly unaffected by events. Tribal alignments were forged in the corridors. We coped by doing whatever we thought might help: meeting the school, meeting a solicitor, trying to find out what might happen as the case progressed. But there was only so much that we could do, and then a weird and contradictory mix of anger and listlessness took over.

Everyday tasks went by the board: the takeaway containers piled up in the bin, clothes went unwashed, the house was a mess. Our physical existence was thrown into a disorder that reflected our mental state. We had no idea how long this might last.

All we could see ahead of us were months of unendurable emotional turmoil and uncertainty. The case file would be collated and passed to the Crown Prosecution Service; the CPS would ponder the matter and decide whether the charge should be taken further; if so, the court would grind into action. The months would pass.

There was no formal support for Jamie, or for us. No counselling, no advice. The only information we could glean about the process came from websites and youth agencies.

What gave us strength were visits from Jamie’s loyal friends (many of them girls) who comforted him and us, and said that they would provide character witnesses because they knew that the charge was a lie. One courageous girl, lately a friend of the accuser, supported him against her, which was gave us hope.

Four days after the allegation was made, Sarah (who had in the meantime been caught in the toilets in a state of undress with another boy), completely retracted her allegation, and the case was officially recorded as “no crime”. According to the investigating officer, her story now went like this: she didn’t realise that Jamie didn’t realise that she didn’t want to do it.

What? We were dumbstruck. This was illogical nonsense. This still positioned Jamie as the perpetrator of a non-consensual act of oral penetration — rape. So how could it be “no crime”? We hit the roof.

Unwillingly, the officer admitted that initially Sarah had said that she was crying and pushing Jamie away from her when the incident happened. Four days after she’d first seen the police, and six days after the incident, she decided that she hadn’t been crying, and she hadn’t pushed him away. The detective sympathetically advised us to go away and get on with our lives, and told Jamie to take a bit more care in the future. And that was it.

It seemed to us that the police were woefully ham-fisted and inept. It was only at the school’s insistence that they had come in to question witnesses. Or at least, witnesses to Sarah’s side of the story. None of Jamie’s friends was approached.

Some weeks after the “no crime” decision had been reached, we asked the police about how a teenage girl might have been treated after making such an allegation. They listed a panoply of provisions: specially trained officers, video recording of interviews, suites with medical facilities, support from social services, child psychologists, the NSPCC, and Rape Crisis.

The process of dealing with suspects is determined by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, we were told. Young persons are always spoken to with an appropriate adult present, and formal interviews are tape-recorded to ensure proper practice. And if completely unfounded allegations are made to them that result in unnecessary inquiries being made, the offence of wasting police time would be considered.

The police also stressed that “all allegations of sexual assault and rape are taken very seriously. This investigation was dealt with expeditiously with the named suspect arrested at an early stage and a decision made to halt proceedings as soon as the new evidence came to light”.

We have no argument with this: all of it is absolutely as it should be for victims of rape. But this supposed rape victim was a 15-year-old girl who had given an ill-advised **** to a 13-year-old boy, and who subsequently felt embarrassed about the incident. Sarah had made the allegation, we later learnt, because she fancied a boy called Rob, and she feared that if word got out about the incident with Jamie, Rob might not be interested in her. The upshot was that our son and our whole family suffered trauma on the back of a teenage whim.

This raises key questions. If the police had acted perceptively, it’s conceivable that none of the succeeding events would have occurred. They seemed to have no inkling of the workings of the teenage world and the teenage mind. A better-trained police force would be able to approach such a scenario a little more astutely.

We are angry because we feel that the police did not consider the circumstances, they did not exercise insight, and they did not appear to pause for thought before throwing the switch on a serious and potentially damaging process. They classified the allegation as rape and therefore they did what the book demanded.

Though we pressed the case strongly, the police were not prepared to lay a charge of wasting police time against the girl. We have no influence over this decision. We have no reparation, unless we are prepared to relive and prolong the agony by taking a civil action against her for making a malicious allegation. Through a third party, we have asked the girl and her parents to consider mediation. All we want is an opportunity to give this girl some — just some — idea of the impact that her frivolous accusation has had. They have refused.

Why should a young girl be able to make a false accusation of such a serious offence with impunity? What impact may this have on her peers? Will they think it is something that they can do, and get away with?

As for Jamie: he has shut it out. He operates, on the surface, as normal. But he tells us that the incident preys on his mind every day. We do not know what impact it might have upon him in future years. We feel indignant on his behalf.

One final observation: my partner is a teacher. We know other teachers in other schools, and they report more problems with a growing minority of teenage girls who are attention-seeking, malicious and manipulative in ways that boys — with a simpler, more literal approach — are not.

There is a tendency towards self-dramatisation. In the past year alone in Jamie’s school a girl arrived claiming to have swallowed an overdose of paracetamol tablets (she hadn’t); other girls have ostentatiously self-harmed (real self-harming is not an ostentatious act), and — in our case — a girl has cried rape.

We are left with the feeling that this girl made herself the star of her own episode of EastEnders. We were just bit-part players in what was, for her, a far bigger and more pressing drama. She is unaware of the damage she caused. All that mattered to her was making sure that Rob didn’t reject her. (He did.)


____________________________
Crosscontinuum Copulation Diety of The Great Enigma
#2 Aug 17 2005 at 3:51 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
360 posts
Too long to read. The title said all I need to know.
____________________________
Wear the grudge like a crown.
#3 Aug 17 2005 at 3:54 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,101 posts
One of my friends was accused of rape falsely also. He went through quite a few embarrassing tests due to his accusation too.

You have to feel bad for all the true rape victims after hearing something like this. I don't think I could come up with a greater insult then to cry wolf here.
____________________________
Me!
#4 Aug 17 2005 at 3:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I think the real issue here is that 13 year old boys are getting blowjobs! Won't somebody think of the children?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#5 Aug 17 2005 at 3:59 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,371 posts
Persoanlly, I think that girls who are proven to have falsely accused rape (i.e. the man was undoubtably somewhere else) should be given a rape level sentence for perverting the course of justice.
____________________________
Crosscontinuum Copulation Diety of The Great Enigma
#6 Aug 17 2005 at 4:00 PM Rating: Good
*****
13,880 posts
So now that she is obviuosly a little whore, get the boys together and gang rape the bi[/b]tch with masks on. Teach that little sl[b]ut a lesson. When she goes to the police, she now has a history of lying about rape. That or just burn her house down because the parents are just as useless as the girl.

Remember kids, violence solves everything, especially in Texas!









#7 Aug 17 2005 at 4:01 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,371 posts
Quote:
I think the real issue here is that 13 year old boys are getting blowjobs! Won't somebody think of the children

Jealousy is an ugly emotion Jophiel!
____________________________
Crosscontinuum Copulation Diety of The Great Enigma
#8 Aug 17 2005 at 4:02 PM Rating: Good
*****
13,880 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I think the real issue here is that 13 year old boys are getting blowjobs! Won't somebody think of the children?


Smiley: laugh

Are there no statutory rape laws in the US?? Smiley: rolleyes

Flip the charges right back! Mruhahah!
#9 Aug 17 2005 at 4:02 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,882 posts
Patrician wrote:
Persoanlly, I think that girls who are proven to have falsely accused rape (i.e. the man was undoubtably somewhere else) should be given a rape level sentence for perverting the course of justice.

Girls who cry rape should be raped.

That is all.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#10 Aug 17 2005 at 4:06 PM Rating: Good
****
4,388 posts
Quote:
Persoanlly, I think that girls who are proven to have falsely accused rape (i.e. the man was undoubtably somewhere else) should be given a rape level sentence for perverting the course of justice.


I seldom agree with an imbecile, but in this I agree.

Great minds think alike....errr, or occasionally you think like a great mind.

Tacosid



Edited, Wed Aug 17 17:10:59 2005 by Tacosid
____________________________
I voted for the other guy.
#11 Aug 17 2005 at 4:06 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,101 posts
Patrician wrote:
Persoanlly, I think that girls who are proven to have falsely accused rape (i.e. the man was undoubtably somewhere else) should be given a rape level sentence for perverting the course of justice.


You should go here

Smiley: wink2
____________________________
Me!
#12 Aug 17 2005 at 4:12 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,371 posts
Taco, as much as we would both love to hate each other, you **** well know we are cast from a similar mold. How you doin'?
____________________________
Crosscontinuum Copulation Diety of The Great Enigma
#13 Aug 17 2005 at 4:14 PM Rating: Good
****
4,388 posts
Quote:
Taco, as much as we would both love to hate each other, you **** well know we are cast from a similar mold. How you doin'?


**** I used to think that too. Then you went and booted me out of a guild when I had recruited roughly 50 percent of the membership.

Sorry to hear about the promotion thing. That is, I am sorry that you did you not get it, but that they did not hold you down and kick you in the nuts a few times for good measure.

I do agree with you on the rape thing though.

Tacosid

Edited, Wed Aug 17 17:14:10 2005 by Tacosid
____________________________
I voted for the other guy.
#14 Aug 17 2005 at 4:18 PM Rating: Default
****
4,131 posts
Tacosid wrote:
Quote:
Taco, as much as we would both love to hate each other, you **** well know we are cast from a similar mold. How you doin'?


**** I used to think that too. Then you went and booted me out of a guild when I had recruited roughly 50 percent of the membership.



Another stat you have devised is that you talk about getting booted from Pat's guild in roughly 50 percent of your posts.

____________________________
The Statement Below is True
The Statement Above is False
#15 Aug 17 2005 at 4:19 PM Rating: Good
****
4,388 posts
And your point is?
____________________________
I voted for the other guy.
#16 Aug 17 2005 at 4:20 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,371 posts
I'm so relieved to have a proper nemesis still knocking around. Aegis has been trying, but as Taco told me, the guy is retarded.
____________________________
Crosscontinuum Copulation Diety of The Great Enigma
#17 Aug 17 2005 at 4:23 PM Rating: Good
****
4,388 posts
You must have mistaken me. I said "Caddila is a retard" or perhaps "if you want to show us what a **** looks like go out and buy a webcam."

Sock Puppets or no, Aegis is the man.

Tacosid
____________________________
I voted for the other guy.
#18 Aug 17 2005 at 4:28 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,371 posts
So Taco, you are still on my shorlist of Alla posters I would like a beer with. Would I have to bring a weapon?
____________________________
Crosscontinuum Copulation Diety of The Great Enigma
#19 Aug 17 2005 at 4:29 PM Rating: Default
*****
10,754 posts
Would you two please just pork and get this over with.






Forgot my manners.

Edited, Wed Aug 17 17:41:34 2005 by NephthysWanderer
____________________________
I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty-cat. I will let you fall in love with that kitty-cat. And then, on some dark, cold night, I will steal away into your home, and PUNCH YOU IN THE FACE.

#20 Aug 17 2005 at 4:33 PM Rating: Good
****
4,388 posts
Quote:
So Taco, you are still on my shorlist of Alla posters I would like a beer with. Would I have to bring a weapon?


Most likely. I would probably recommend an axe or something else highly visible and intimidating. Your accent would offset anything less imposing.

Hell, two years ago I would have paid for the beer.

Tacosid
____________________________
I voted for the other guy.
#21 Aug 17 2005 at 4:35 PM Rating: Good
****
4,388 posts
Quote:
Would you two please just pork and get this over with.


I see. Well, since you apparently like to get busy with the guys that you are friends and/or enemies with, then you are certainly not on my short list to go get a beer with.

Tacosid
____________________________
I voted for the other guy.
#22 Aug 17 2005 at 4:42 PM Rating: Default
*****
10,754 posts
Quote:
I see. Well, since you apparently like to get busy with the guys that you are friends and/or enemies with, then you are certainly not on my short list to go get a beer with.

Tacosid


And here I thought that was my in. I'll never be popular Smiley: frown
____________________________
I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty-cat. I will let you fall in love with that kitty-cat. And then, on some dark, cold night, I will steal away into your home, and PUNCH YOU IN THE FACE.

#23 Aug 17 2005 at 5:04 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
876 posts
Back to the main point

Girls who do this a plain and simple SLUTS they regret doing something with some guy drunk at a party so they use the get out of jail free card, call rape.

I defienently agree that faking rape should be a criminal offense as well as rape itself.
____________________________
This is my signature, there are many like it but this one is mine.
__________________________________________________________________

Byntre Level 80 Nightelf Rogue
#24 Aug 17 2005 at 5:07 PM Rating: Default
****
4,131 posts
Tacosid wrote:
And your point is?


It's pathetic.
____________________________
The Statement Below is True
The Statement Above is False
#25 Aug 17 2005 at 6:09 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,454 posts
Not really surprising though. We headed down this "slipperly slope" when we started putting weight in the idea of date rape.

I'm sorry, but if there's no signs of struggle, you weren't raped. You just made a bad choice. Deal with it...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#26 Aug 17 2005 at 6:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Gbaji wrote:
Not really surprising though. We headed down this "slipperly slope" when we started putting weight in the idea of date rape.

I'm sorry, but if there's no signs of struggle, you weren't raped. You just made a bad choice. Deal with it...
'The hell? The whole idea behind "date rape" is simply that you're raped by someone you've agreed to meet and spend time with as opposed to getting jumped by random hoods in a back alley or parking lot. Typically when you say "date rape", it conjures visions of drugging the woman or physical threat. What in God's name makes that a "slippery slope" towards this? If I slip some lass a few roofies in her wine and fu[i][/i]ck her unconscious body, it's just "bad decision making" on her part due to lack of a struggle? But if I beat her around the head with the bottle, it's suddenly rape?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#27 Aug 17 2005 at 6:20 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,563 posts
^^^
Gbaji pilfers all his ideas from these people.

It's like a reference guide for Neocons.


____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#28 Aug 17 2005 at 6:20 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
I'm sorry, but if there's no signs of struggle, you weren't raped. You just made a bad choice. Deal with it...


What about cases of date rape drugs? Or, in cases when the victim was intimidated? Such as mental deficiency, or even in response to threats like I'm going to kill your family if you don't do this and smile?
____________________________
Nicroll 65 Assassin
Teltorid 52 Druid
Aude Sapere

Oh **** camp me all you want f**kers. I own this site and thus I own you. - Allakhazam
#29 Aug 17 2005 at 7:04 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
3,829 posts
Quote:
'm sorry, but if there's no signs of struggle, you weren't raped. You just made a bad choice. Deal with it...


Oh for Christ's sake, Gbaji...f[/b]u[b]ck that idea and f[/b]u[b]ck you if that is what you honestly think.

If a man holds a knife on a woman and tells her that if she doesn't have **** with him, he will slit her throat, that is rape. If he threatens to kill her children if she doesn't have **** with him, it's rape. If he drugs her and has **** with her semi- or unconscious person, it's rape. If he, in any way, somehow manages to force her to have **** with or without leaving bruises, it's rape. There are a thousand ways rape can occur without leaving signs of physical assault. It doesn't matter if there are signs of a struggle or not, it is still violent coercion.

No matter how intellectual you try to be, Gbaji, you have just definitively proven you are nothing more than a well-spoken troglodyte.

edit: finally figured out how to break the swear filter!

Edited, Thu Aug 18 03:00:23 2005 by Ambrya
____________________________
"Is it wrong for me to long for the simpler days of yesteryear when performers weren't so confusing? Jagger, Bowie...you KNEW they were women. But nowadays, this internationally ranked cheerleading coach just can't figure it out. Neil Patrick Harris? You confuse me. I HEAR you're gay, but there you are on my TV playing a normal, womanizing, cardigan-wearing straight. That's confusing. And then I heard a rumor you're not actually a doctor. So much sneaky **** deception!" --Sue's Corner
#30 Aug 17 2005 at 7:45 PM Rating: Good
****
5,310 posts
When Gbaji trolls, he uses a big lure. Smiley: wink2
____________________________
"God created man from a handful of dust, and he created woman from that man's rib. And these two together were so stupid that they weren't on the planet five minutes when they managed to get a curse put on all future generations. Nice work." Pat Condell
#31 Aug 17 2005 at 8:48 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,454 posts
Ambrya wrote:
Quote:
'm sorry, but if there's no signs of struggle, you weren't raped. You just made a bad choice. Deal with it...


Oh for Christ's sake, Gbaji...fuck that idea and fuck you if that is what you honestly think.

If a man holds a knife on a woman and tells her that if she doesn't have **** with him, he will slit her throat, that is rape. If he threatens to kill her children if she doesn't have **** with him, it's rape. If he drugs her and has **** with her semi- or unconscious person, it's rape. If he, in any way, somehow manages to force her to have **** with or without leaving bruises, it's rape. There are a thousand ways rape can occur without leaving signs of physical assault. It doesn't matter if there are signs of a struggle or not, it is still violent coercion.

No matter how intellectual you try to be, Gbaji, you have just definitively proven you are nothing more than a well-spoken troglodyte.



Sigh. None of which changes the statement I made. Do you have any idea of how infrequently a woman ends up with a knife to her throat and forced to have **** with someone and there is *no* sign of physical trauma on her body as a result? If it's in her home, there will be signs of a break in. If it's not, there will be signs of her trying to get away before he grabs her. Even if he manages to get ahold of her and get a knife to her throat without any struggle occuring beforehand, there will be signs of brusing on her body. Forensic scientists can tell if **** was consentual or not quite accurately, no matter how much other violence occured.

Rapists of that type are not about having sex. It's a violent act. They *always* leave marks. There's always physical evidence to indicate a rape occured.

That's what I'm talking about. My disgust with the whole date rape issue is two things:

1. It's impossible for anyone to forensically or otherwise determine if the claim of rape is true.

2. It cheapens the entire issue for woman who have *actually* been raped since they're lumped in the same catagory with women who actually did have a choice.



I'm not talking about a woman going on a date with someone and then being raped by that person. That's rape and always has been. What "date rape" is, is when a woman has **** with someone but says she didn't really want to. There's no way to tell if a woman had **** with the guy because she felt she had no choice at the time, or if she had it consentually and later felt bad about it and claimed he made her do it. Look at the documented cases of date rape out there. They are *not* what many people think. It's really not about women raped by people they date. It's women getting themselves into situations where they feel pressure to have **** with someone, but instead of refusing go along with it, and then after the fact feel they've been taken advantage of.


While I agree that guys shouldn't pressure women about sex, I believe that if you don't actually say no, and he doesn't actually ignore you and *physically* force you to have **** with him, then you weren't actually raped. You were just talked into doing something you didn't want to do. That's still a choice.


That's ultimately my problem with date rape. It's distinguished from "real" rape in that in a real rape situation the woman has no choice and no chance to avoid it. In date rape situations, the woman did have a choice. She could have physically walked out of the room. If he physically stops her *then* it's rape. But in virtually every case of "date rape" I've seen, that's not what happens. The woman chooses to have **** with him to avoid a percieved negative consequence ("I thought he would hurt me if I didn't have **** with him"). But since they never actually establish that he would have done so, it's effectively all in her head and extremely subjective. Maybe that guy would have gotten violent with you if you'd not given in to him. But maybe not. You don't know since you avoided the situation. Trying to charge him with a crime based on what you think he might have done is ridiculous IMO.


It applies directly to this case, because this is a direct result of that kind of thinking. Here you have a case where the woman cries rape after giving a guy a blowjob. It's a perfect example of the "slipperly slope" coming true. Since we've already established that a woman can charge someone with rape with no physical evidence, no witnesses, and no proof other then her own testimony, it's only a matter of time before we see a situation exactly like this. Some poor guy getting charged with rape on a whim from a woman who doesn't want people to think she's a slut.


If we didn't already have such a ridiculous stance towards date rape, this girls charge would have been ignored right off the bat. No bruises. No sign of struggle. No sign of rape. No charge without some other coroboration. Everyone is standing around wondering how on earth the police could have charged that guy with a crime, yet no one seems to get that it's the direct result of the changes we've made in terms of rape charges in general. It's not the police's fault. They're following the laws as written. It's the idiot legistlatures who've redefined rape in such a way as to take any claim of rape from a woman as factual regardless of a total lack of any physical evidence.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#32 Aug 17 2005 at 8:55 PM Rating: Decent
*****
16,281 posts
gbaji, do you realize that most women will be (or have been) raped at some point in their life? I'm sure a few of the females on this board can attest to that. There are not always physical marks left.

Trust me.
#33 Aug 17 2005 at 8:56 PM Rating: Default
**
535 posts
Mistress Nadenu wrote:
gbaji, do you realize that most women will be (or have been) raped at some point in their life? I'm sure a few of the females on this board can attest to that. There are not always physical marks left.

Trust me.


Cite?
____________________________
Quote:
Women: You can't live with them, and you can't get them to dress up in a skimpy **** costume and beat you with a warm squash
#34 Aug 17 2005 at 9:01 PM Rating: Good
****
5,310 posts
Gbaji wrote:
What "date rape" is, is when a woman has **** with someone but says she didn't really want to.
Just because you don't like the term "date rape" doesn't mean you get to make up a "Gbaji Definition".

And Nadenu is right. Physical assaults do not always leave marks.
____________________________
"God created man from a handful of dust, and he created woman from that man's rib. And these two together were so stupid that they weren't on the planet five minutes when they managed to get a curse put on all future generations. Nice work." Pat Condell
#35 Aug 17 2005 at 9:25 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,454 posts
Mistress Nadenu wrote:
gbaji, do you realize that most women will be (or have been) raped at some point in their life? I'm sure a few of the females on this board can attest to that. There are not always physical marks left.

Trust me.


I'm far more aware of that then you probably think. But I don't agree with your second assertion. While I'm sure it's possible to be raped with no physical evidence, that's going to be extremely rare compared to the number of times women *can* claim rape in a date rape situation (and, as this article shows, do), with no evidence to support their claim, but due to law changes they can destroy a man's life anyway.


I'm sorry. This is one issue I feel very strongly about. If you are raped, you are raped. There's no question about it. There's no "Gee. I kinda didn't want to, but he made me" about it. There will be physical signs of rape. Always. I simply don't buy the whole "psychological pressure" idea. By that rule, I can charge soemone with assault because they talked me into buying crappy insurance or something.

You are in charge of your own body. Always. You can *always* choose to leave if you want. You can always physically resist something. Always. If you actually physicaly cannot resist *then* a crime has been commited. Until that point, you haven't been "force" to do something. To me, that's kind of obvious. I also think it's incredibly demeaning to imply that women can't make up their own minds and take responsiblity for their choices. And that's far more often what date rape ends out being. An easy out for women who don't want to take that responsibility.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#36 Aug 17 2005 at 9:27 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,454 posts
Yanari the Puissant wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
What "date rape" is, is when a woman has **** with someone but says she didn't really want to.
Just because you don't like the term "date rape" doesn't mean you get to make up a "Gbaji Definition".

And Nadenu is right. Physical assaults do not always leave marks.


Huh? "Physical assaults" *always* leave marks. Otherwise they aren't really physical assaults. Or not terribly serious ones anyway. You can get a bruise banging your arm on a desk corner. Exactly how physical was the assault if there's not a single bruise or scratch on your entire body? Does that really qualify anymore?

Sorry. Don't buy it. It smacks of redefining things to suit a convenient political agenda while tossing out all logic and reason.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#37 Aug 17 2005 at 9:33 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,383 posts
Politics, logic, and reason don't belong in the same sentece. Just to big of an oxymoron.
____________________________
Eggy Weggs



#38 Aug 17 2005 at 10:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Gbaji wrote:
What "date rape" is, is when a woman has **** with someone but says she didn't really want to.
Says who? Here's a fun task: Type "what is date rape" into Google and let us know what comes up.

Quote:
Look at the documented cases of date rape out there. They are *not* what many people think.
Fine, get to work citing some hard numbers. If you're going to make asinine arguments, you'd better have something to back them up with beside Gbaji-guesses.

Edited, Wed Aug 17 23:18:48 2005 by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#39 Aug 17 2005 at 10:36 PM Rating: Good
Sage
***
3,829 posts
Gbaji, you have now made it perfectly clear that, on top of being a misogynist ignoramus, you know absolutely nothing about physiology, forensics, or the psychopathology of rapists. Rape isn't about violence, it's about power, it's about control. It's about taking someone's power away and subjugating them to your will, and the idea that such a thing cannot be accomplished without leaving signs of physical trauma is absurd.

Aside from the various coercive methodology that can be used to accomplish such an end without leaving marks, there's also the fact that even if violence were involved, some women just don't bruise easily. I should know, I am one of them. I don't have a lot of surface capillaries. As I have mentioned before, my husband and I dabble in consentual S&M. I have taken an intense flogging with a braided elk-skin cat-o-nine-tails and come away with nary a mark.

And that doesn't even address the idea of psychological coercion or the threat of violence.

Example: a man walks into the home a woman shares with her children in the early evening, when the kitchen door is still unlocked, which means there's no sign of B&E. He finds the woman finishing up the dishes at the sink and herds her into the bedroom, and tells her if she doesn't get undressed and perform **** on him, he'll go shoot her children who are still watching TV in the living room unaware of what is going on. You think that she will put up a struggle with her children's safety at stake? **** no. Afterward, he orders her to spread her legs, and because the physiological effects of fear are often the very same as those of arousal, her body provides vaginal lubrication, which means that there are no signs of vaginal trauma. He might be completely tender and behave as though he's making love to her. If he hits the right physical buttons, she might even have an orgasm.

That doesn't mean she hasn't UNQUESTIONABLY been raped. And if she knew the guy (for instance, he's a coworker she invited over for dinner, instead of just someone who walked in) it qualifies as "date rape."

Another example, since you are so hung up on date rape. A guy takes a woman out to dinner. They're having a good time. They go parking in the middle of nowhere, and make out a little. He pressures her for more, she doesn't want to give it and tells him she would like to go home. He says if she doesn't put out, she has to walk home. It's the middle of the night and she's out in the middle of nowhere. Walking home would be extremely dangerous. She might injure herself walking in the dark, she might get hit by a car not watching for pedestrians on a deserted road, she might get lost, depending on the weather, exposure might be a very real danger, or she might just encounter someone who is more interested in killing her than raping her. How is she supposed to be able to "get up and leave the room"? So yes, she might "choose" to submit, because what choice does she actually have? That doesn't mean that coercion wasn't used. It was still rape.

So I say again, with utmost sincerity, Gbaji, f[/b]u[b]ck you. Your pretensions at intellectualism have been laid bare for the world to see. Now go back to your cave and work on making fire.


Edited, Thu Aug 18 08:02:13 2005 by Ambrya
____________________________
"Is it wrong for me to long for the simpler days of yesteryear when performers weren't so confusing? Jagger, Bowie...you KNEW they were women. But nowadays, this internationally ranked cheerleading coach just can't figure it out. Neil Patrick Harris? You confuse me. I HEAR you're gay, but there you are on my TV playing a normal, womanizing, cardigan-wearing straight. That's confusing. And then I heard a rumor you're not actually a doctor. So much sneaky **** deception!" --Sue's Corner
#40 Aug 17 2005 at 10:48 PM Rating: Default
******
20,649 posts
Is anyone actually surprised that a guy like Gbaji takes the position "Date rape doesnt count"?
____________________________
Bode - 90 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#41 Aug 17 2005 at 10:51 PM Rating: Default
**
535 posts
Quote:
Rape isn't about violence, it's about power, it's about control. It's about taking someone's power away and subjugating them to your will, and the idea that such a thing cannot be accomplished without leaving signs of physical trauma is absurd.


How would you know? Are you a rapist?
____________________________
Quote:
Women: You can't live with them, and you can't get them to dress up in a skimpy **** costume and beat you with a warm squash
#42 Aug 17 2005 at 10:51 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
3,829 posts
Quote:
Is anyone actually surprised that a guy like Gbaji takes the position "Date rape doesnt count"?


Actually, a little...I've never liked or agreed with Gbaji, but I never actually thought he was an idiot.
____________________________
"Is it wrong for me to long for the simpler days of yesteryear when performers weren't so confusing? Jagger, Bowie...you KNEW they were women. But nowadays, this internationally ranked cheerleading coach just can't figure it out. Neil Patrick Harris? You confuse me. I HEAR you're gay, but there you are on my TV playing a normal, womanizing, cardigan-wearing straight. That's confusing. And then I heard a rumor you're not actually a doctor. So much sneaky **** deception!" --Sue's Corner
#43 Aug 17 2005 at 10:52 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
3,829 posts
Quote:
How would you know? Are you a rapist?


I've done my research, a[/b]s[b]shole. As a woman whose career deals with women's health issues, this is a pretty relevent topic.



Edited, Thu Aug 18 02:55:51 2005 by Ambrya
____________________________
"Is it wrong for me to long for the simpler days of yesteryear when performers weren't so confusing? Jagger, Bowie...you KNEW they were women. But nowadays, this internationally ranked cheerleading coach just can't figure it out. Neil Patrick Harris? You confuse me. I HEAR you're gay, but there you are on my TV playing a normal, womanizing, cardigan-wearing straight. That's confusing. And then I heard a rumor you're not actually a doctor. So much sneaky **** deception!" --Sue's Corner
#44 Aug 17 2005 at 10:54 PM Rating: Default
**
535 posts
Ambrya wrote:
Quote:
How would you know? Are you a rapist?


I've done my research, asshole. As a woman whose career deals with women's health issues, this is a pretty relevent topic.



Edited, Wed Aug 17 23:51:18 2005 by Ambrya


What research, **** Have you talked to a rapist?
____________________________
Quote:
Women: You can't live with them, and you can't get them to dress up in a skimpy **** costume and beat you with a warm squash
#45 Aug 17 2005 at 10:55 PM Rating: Default
******
20,649 posts
Everything Gbaji say is just a well cited, over typed ignorance.

Doesnt matter if he is talking politics, religion, cheques or date rape. He figures if he has a enough words and cites that its somehow right.

Smiley: oyvey

____________________________
Bode - 90 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#46 Aug 17 2005 at 10:59 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
3,829 posts
Quote:
What research, **** Have you talked to a rapist?


Let's see...innumerable psychology texts, abnormal psychology classes, video and transcripts of interviews with rapists, personal interviews with rape victims...the list goes on.

Now do you actually have anything relevent to contribute to this dialogue, or shall I just assume you're an attention-grubbing whore/troll and ignore you from here on out?



____________________________
"Is it wrong for me to long for the simpler days of yesteryear when performers weren't so confusing? Jagger, Bowie...you KNEW they were women. But nowadays, this internationally ranked cheerleading coach just can't figure it out. Neil Patrick Harris? You confuse me. I HEAR you're gay, but there you are on my TV playing a normal, womanizing, cardigan-wearing straight. That's confusing. And then I heard a rumor you're not actually a doctor. So much sneaky **** deception!" --Sue's Corner
#47 Aug 17 2005 at 11:00 PM Rating: Good
*****
13,880 posts
proofeleven wrote:
Ambrya wrote:
Quote:
How would you know? Are you a rapist?


I've done my research, asshole. As a woman whose career deals with women's health issues, this is a pretty relevent topic.



Edited, Wed Aug 17 23:51:18 2005 by Ambrya


What research, **** Have you talked to a rapist?


She talked to you didn't she?
#48 Aug 17 2005 at 11:02 PM Rating: Default
**
535 posts
Ambrya wrote:
Quote:
What research, **** Have you talked to a rapist?


Let's see...innumerable psychology texts, abnormal psychology classes, video and transcripts of interviews with rapists, personal interviews with rape victims...the list goes on.


You didnt talk to any rapists though, did you?

Quote:

Now do you actually have anything relevent to contribute to this dialogue, or shall I just assume you're an attention-grubbing whore/troll and ignore you from here on out?


If you havent figured that out yyet, you shouldnt be podting in the asylum

I hope you get raped
____________________________
Quote:
Women: You can't live with them, and you can't get them to dress up in a skimpy **** costume and beat you with a warm squash
#49 Aug 17 2005 at 11:03 PM Rating: Good
*****
13,880 posts
proofeleven wrote:
Interview me bi[b][/b]tch, I have raped 100's of little boys.



Fixed.
#50 Aug 17 2005 at 11:04 PM Rating: Decent
**
535 posts
ElderonXI the Wise wrote:
proofeleven wrote:
Interview me bi[b][/b]tch, I have raped 100's of little boys.



Fixed.


You only count as one
____________________________
Quote:
Women: You can't live with them, and you can't get them to dress up in a skimpy **** costume and beat you with a warm squash
#51 Aug 17 2005 at 11:15 PM Rating: Good
*****
13,880 posts
proofeleven wrote:
ElderonXI the Wise wrote:
proofeleven wrote:
Interview me bi[b][/b]tch, I have raped 100's of little boys.



Fixed.


You only count as one


Weak sauce. Come on you can do better than that. Oh wait... maybe you can't.
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help