"He stuck his hands down the sweatpants and was touching me up, like my shirt as well, so I kept telling him, 'no,'"
And yet you continued to be around him and kept drinking...
What he did was wrong and he should be in jail, but *you* made yourself a victim there. *You* got yourself raped.
I have *no* sympathy for rapists, but I also have *no* sympathy for stupidity.
Hopefully you've at least learned that when a guy continues to ignore your rejections, he'll probably rape you given half a chance (say, for example, being alone with him and drinking until you pass out).
Sometimes you really can't prevent bad things from happening to you. This was *not* one of those times.
1. It is believed he slipped someting in a drink HE bought for me.
2. HE came in the bathroom once before I had passed out...and i told him NO repeatedly. I thought he left. I didn't continue to be around him...HE came back later after I had passed out.
Maybe you should get your facts straight before you jump to conclusions. The CBS Story didn't soley focus on my story (didn't cover all the details) its intent was to raise awareness to a bigger issue (Rape Kits not being Tested)effecting this nation.
SHE did not ASK for this to happen to her. She did not want this to happen to her - she SAID NO - no matter if alcohol was involved or not he had no right to take advantage of her or the situation - he should be man enough to WALK AWAY and realize what he is prying on. You are the reason our JUSTICE SYSTEM is F****D up for acquaintance rapes in this country because Jurors like you can't comprehend that NO MEANS NO - No matter the circumstances!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SHE did not ASK for this to happen to her. She did not want this to happen to her - she SAID NO - no matter if alcohol was involved or not he had no right to take advantage of her or the situation - he should be man enough to WALK AWAY and realize what he is prying on. You are the reason our JUSTICE SYSTEM is F****D up for acquaintance rapes in this country because Jurors like you can't comprehend that NO MEANS NO -No matter the circumstances - He had the responsiblity to walk away knowing she was not in the right state of mind!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
honestly_disagreeable, I'm bothered by the way you equate rapists with women you view as showing stupidity. The first is a personal crime, the second is not. The person who had the legal responsibility for preventing rape was the rapist. This woman did not make herself a victim.
She did not get herself raped. By making this claim you are undermining your statement that what her rapist did was wrong and that he should be in jail. This attitude is why so many rapists are not prosecuted and why so many who are prosecuted are not convicted.
It is also why so many rapists feel justified in committing rape against non-strangers. You are much harsher on this woman than you are on her rapist.
I can only quote: It?s a rude...awakening when a woman gets raped, and follows the rules she has been taught her whole life ? doesn?t refuse to talk, doesn?t refuse to flirt, doesn?t walk away ignoring him, doesn?t hit, doesn?t scream, doesn?t fight, doesn?t raise her voice, doesn?t deny she liked kissing ? and finds out after that she is now to blame for the rape. She followed the rules. The rules that were supposed to keep the rape from happening. The rules that would keep her from being fair game for verbal and physical abuse. Breaking the rules is supposed to result in punishment, not following them. For every time she lowered her voice, let go of a boundary, didn?t move away, let her needs be conveniently misinterpreted, and was given positive reinforcement and a place in society, she is now being told that all that was wrong, this one time, and she should have known that, duh.
For anybody who has ever watched the gendered social interactions of women ? watched a woman get browbeaten into accepting attention she doesn?t want, watched a woman get interrupted while speaking, watched a woman deny she is upset at being insulted in public, watched a woman get grabbed because of what she was wearing, watched a woman stop arguing ? and said and done nothing, you never have the right to ever ask, ?Why didn?t she fight back??
She didn?t fight back because you told her not to. Ever. Ever. You told her that was okay, and necessary, and right.
You didn?t give her a caveat. You didn?t say, ?Unless?? You said, ?Good for you, shutting up and backing down 99% of the time. Too bad that 1% of the time makes you a f*cking wh*re who deserved it.? http://fugitivus.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/another-post-about-rape-3/
VMNeumann, last I checked, drinking is neither a crime for those over 21 nor at all uncommon a pass time for men or women. The penalty for public intoxication is a fine and perhaps some time in the drunk tank, not rape. You know what is a crime? Rape.
honestly_disagreeable, you may not know it but you are PART OF THE PROBLEM here. This is what's known as rape culture, which includes victim blaming and rape apologists. This attitude is the reason that rapists feel fine about molesting women and that investigations into these matters are shoddy and poorly performed. No one feels any pressure to serve these victims because women are thought of as victims of THEFT and not ASSAULT. And it is because of these shoddy investigations that thousands of rapes go unreported every year. These victims KNOW that cards are stacked against them because some righteous person is going to come along and tell them they should have been more virginal, more chaste, more covered up, more guarded. Women modify their behavior to avoid being victimized every single day. The fact that they feel the need to is simply sad and a disgusting statement about our culture. The fact that the world is a dangerous place DOES NOT come into play in a murder case, why does it come to play in a rape case? Because women are the gatekeepers of their own chastity? What this man did to her WAS NOT theft, it was a violent, disgusting crime, and it is completely disgusting to hold the victim responsible for his behavior.
It is not smart for men or women to get extremely intoxicated as we all engage in behaviour we may not normally. However, most people do this and many have had that random hookup with a man or woman you met that you vehemently regret or sometimes don't remember any part of, just that you were at the bar together. In college I can remember a couple times I blacked out and had people tell me about what I did but I can't remember several hours. Having sex with a passed out person is rape or if someone says no but is so drunk they can't do anything that is also rape. But if someone has sex with some one while they are drunk and don't remeber because they blacked out but at the time was wanting it, or maybe they were the one persuing it but regret or don't remember the next day so they assume they were raped, that is equally bad. We can't tip the scale too far one way or the other because convicting an inncent person is as bad or worse then letting a guilty one go.
Having sex with someone who is too drunk to consent is rape. Even if they won't remember it tomorrow. Even if they were the aggressor. Even if they were wearing a short skirt. Even if they were drinking "Sex on the Beach". Even if. See, the issue is "consent". A drunk person cannot consent. Honestly. Rape apologia has got to end.
It is not smart for men or women to get extremely intoxicated as we all engage in behaviour we may not normally. However, most people do this and many have had that random hookup with a man or woman you met that you vehemently regret or sometimes don't remember any part of, just that you were at the bar together. In college I can remember a couple times I blacked out and had people tell me about what I did but I can't remember several hours. Having sex with a passed out person is rape or if someone says no but is so drunk they can't do anything that is also rape. But if someone has sex with some one while they are drunk and don't remeber because they blacked out but at the time was wanting it, or maybe they were the one persuing it but regret or don't remember the next day so they assume they were raped, that is equally bad. We can't tip the scale too far one way or the other because convicting an inncent person is as bad or worse then letting a guilty one go.
Rape is a crime and should be prosecuted regardless of the cost of processing an evidence kit. Rapes that go unpunished only lead to more rapes committed by the perpetrator. The young woman in this case was obviously very foolish and put herself in harms way by allowing herself to become intoxicated beyond consciousness. That doesn't mean that the rape was her fault, it just means she made herself a potential victim. As women we have to be responsible for ourselves and our safety; Just as this young woman acted carelessly, such is the case with so many others, and it would be interesting to know just what percentage of rapes that have occurred could have possibly been avoided. Two lessons are to be learned from this article ... first and foremost, don't set yourself up to be a victim, and any county or city that refuses to test evidence due to cost should be seriously evaluated and budgets should be re-evaluated and priorities set. Public safety is a priority and so is justice ... in any community.
it's an unfortunate spiral: prosecutors have to judge what cases they can win on a limited budget: they look at rape prosecution history and find a low conviction rate, so they throw resources against categories of crime with higher conviction rates, make rape victims work hard to justify bringing a case when their natural tendency is to just want to get past it, leading to decreased expertise in bringing rape cases, leading to lower conviction rates.
justamoment1, I disagree that this woman was obviously very foolish and put herself in harms way by allowing herself to become intoxicated. Many women become intoxicated to beyond consciousness and are not raped. Many women do everything they are told to do in order to avoid rape yet are still raped. The cause of rape is not intoxication or any other vulnerability, but the presence of someone willing to rape.
If as women we have to be responsible for our own safety then women in nursing homes are also responsible for ensuring they aren't raped.
The first lesson should be, first and foremost, don't be a rapist under any circumstance. We should make it clear that if someone rapes they will not be excused no matter what people think about their chosen victim. If we as a society fail to send this message to rapists and those tempted to rape then we as a society are more responsible for rape than any victim ever could be.
Woman CAN and DO change their mind. Sometimes a woman says "yes" but later decides she meant "no." Sometimes a woman says "no" but later says "yes." Men are not mind-readers. You cannot always tell when someone is impaired. A man should NOT be held criminally responsible if the woman did not communicate clearly.
Look, no means no. If you aren't sure what she means, then it means "no". If she can't reply because she's had too much to drink, etc or if you "can't tell when someone is impaired" then it means "no". There you go--you no longer have to be a "mind reader". Not having a law that these kits have to be tested is just another way in which women are second class citizens and will remain so until we make up 50% of our government.
I find it difficult to understand why a woman who says yes and decides later that she really shouldn't have said yes would then go through the effort of reporting that she was raped, which, I understand, requires a LOT of effort on her part.
I would guess that women who bring rape charges (and those who were raped, but don't bring charges) overwhelmingly said no and meant no, or were in no condition to say anything or to effectively resist, and were taken advantage of while in that condition.
I agree: no means no. Given all that, though, it is unfortunate that often the situation is such that both persons involved are drunk, and judgement on both sides is lacking. It's one reason why, if a man does not want to be accused of rape, he should avoid sex while drinking, at least with new potential partners.
Larry33333333333, Your statement about women changing their minds can easily describe situations where a man never had legal consent. Too many men coerce a yes out of someone who said no or who signalled their lack of consent in other ways and then try to pass that off as legal consent when it is no such thing.
Many rapes involve victims too intoxicated to clearly communicate their lack of consent. Your statement of when a man should NOT be held criminally responsible falsely negates all these rapes.
Mind reading is not required. Any situation where this seems to be required should be a signal to walk away.
Why is it only irresponsible risky behavior for women? Consent can NEVER be given when intoxicated, it's that simple. Guys should not engage in risky behavior of taking advantage of impaired women. It is our responsibility to protect ourselves and not abuse women. Getting some is not more important than being respectful human beings. Woman never "revoke" consent after the fact, it was just NEVER given in the first place, no matter what they may have said. Wait until they are sober, be a decent human being.
Some women like to party with alcohol then do things they later regret. Choosing to drink should not give a woman the power to rescind consent _after the fact_. Again, women need to take some responsibility for their choices. Stay sober, double date, don't have sex outside of a committed relationship or put yourself in questionable circumstances. Then the courts won't have to play guessing games and the cops won't feel like their wasting their time processing rape kits that will never go to trial.
"Regret" over some loser guy one picked up because one showed some poor judgement at a party is much much different from being forced. I know of no woman who would confuse the two.
MEN needto take responsibility for their choices. Forget no means no, make your mantra "yes means yes". If you don't have a clear and enthusiastic yes, then it means NO. Not hard. Get it?
Women don't "put themselves in questionable circumstances". Rapists search out people to rape. Big difference.
how on earth does being celibate protect one from rape?
Whys333, you've just used a popular myth (rape of those who have been drinking as nothing more than regret) to negate the responsibility of all those who rape those who are not sober which is dangerously close to declaring the rape of those who have been drinking to be legal.
Since you assume many women who have sex after drinking are legally consenting and will try to rescind that consent after the fact, why don't you tell men to take some responsbilities for their choices in the face of this belief?
Why don't you tell men to never have sex with women who've been drinking and to never have sex outside of committed relationships? Then "the courts won't have to play guessing games"?
This article demonstrates the incredible need to DECRIMINALIZE adult PROSTITUTION. There is a direct correlation between the average cost of a prostitutes services and rape. In other words, when prostitutes are more expensive the number of women raped increases. The criminalization of prostitution, as we now have in every state except Nevada, obviously does nothing to eliminate prostitution but it does drive up the costs of a prostitutes services. Thus, women who work in the sex-trade are harmed by being made criminals and receiving abuse at the hands of the state. And women in general are harmed because there is significantly more instances of the crime of rape than there would be is prostitution were decriminalized. Let's finally get our heads out of our ***** and do what is best for the public's health and what is best for all women (and men) - DECRIMINALIZE PROSTITUTION.
I'm sorry but this is nonsense. Rape is not about a lack of access to sex.
Men who want to use sex to hurt women will at most redirect their violence to more acceptable targets. Since women in prostitution already face a high risk of being murdered directing rapists toward them seems inhumane. That doesn't sound like what is best for all women.
by bambiduff November 10, 2009 4:38 PM EST Review the comment he said he rapes every time he goes to a bar.
by Skirt-Lifter November 10, 2009 1:55 PM EST By your definition I have raped many, many women over the years, and they liked it ... well ... most of 'em anyway ... can't please 'em all.
I think, Bambi, that YOU should review the comment. If that is what you got from this statement, you need to go back to school.
He stated that he did not have sex with her.....test the rape kit...if it is his DNA he is lying...
I would think if he did have sex with her he would say they had consensual sex. But he is saying that he didn't have sex with her....so test the rape kit....let him prove his innocence.
Also, if she was out of it because of drinking or if he gave her something in her drink....it is still rape....she wasn't in any position to stop him....he took advantage of her and the situation and that is rape.....
And that is a lame excuse for not having the rape kit tested....because it wasn't winnable....how arrogant...we're not talking about wins and losses....we are talking about a human being that may have been raped and whose body has been violated...you are a prosecuting attorney not a judge to decide this outcome..do your own job....shame on you, Mr. Sanders
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
And yet you continued to be around him and kept drinking...
What he did was wrong and he should be in jail, but *you* made yourself a victim there. *You* got yourself raped.
I have *no* sympathy for rapists, but I also have *no* sympathy for stupidity.
Hopefully you've at least learned that when a guy continues to ignore your rejections, he'll probably rape you given half a chance (say, for example, being alone with him and drinking until you pass out).
Sometimes you really can't prevent bad things from happening to you. This was *not* one of those times.
2. HE came in the bathroom once before I had passed out...and i told him NO repeatedly. I thought he left. I didn't continue to be around him...HE came back later after I had passed out.
Maybe you should get your facts straight before you jump to conclusions. The CBS Story didn't soley focus on my story (didn't cover all the details) its intent was to raise awareness to a bigger issue (Rape Kits not being Tested)effecting this nation.
She did not get herself raped. By making this claim you are undermining your statement that what her rapist did was wrong and that he should be in jail. This attitude is why so many rapists are not prosecuted and why so many who are prosecuted are not convicted.
It is also why so many rapists feel justified in committing rape against non-strangers. You are much harsher on this woman than you are on her rapist.
For anybody who has ever watched the gendered social interactions of women ? watched a woman get browbeaten into accepting attention she doesn?t want, watched a woman get interrupted while speaking, watched a woman deny she is upset at being insulted in public, watched a woman get grabbed because of what she was wearing, watched a woman stop arguing ? and said and done nothing, you never have the right to ever ask, ?Why didn?t she fight back??
She didn?t fight back because you told her not to. Ever. Ever. You told her that was okay, and necessary, and right.
You didn?t give her a caveat. You didn?t say, ?Unless?? You said, ?Good for you, shutting up and backing down 99% of the time. Too bad that 1% of the time makes you a f*cking wh*re who deserved it.?
http://fugitivus.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/another-post-about-rape-3/
If as women we have to be responsible for our own safety then women in nursing homes are also responsible for ensuring they aren't raped.
The first lesson should be, first and foremost, don't be a rapist under any circumstance. We should make it clear that if someone rapes they will not be excused no matter what people think about their chosen victim. If we as a society fail to send this message to rapists and those tempted to rape then we as a society are more responsible for rape than any victim ever could be.
I would guess that women who bring rape charges (and those who were raped, but don't bring charges) overwhelmingly said no and meant no, or were in no condition to say anything or to effectively resist, and were taken advantage of while in that condition.
I agree: no means no. Given all that, though, it is unfortunate that often the situation is such that both persons involved are drunk, and judgement on both sides is lacking. It's one reason why, if a man does not want to be accused of rape, he should avoid sex while drinking, at least with new potential partners.
Many rapes involve victims too intoxicated to clearly communicate their lack of consent. Your statement of when a man should NOT be held criminally responsible falsely negates all these rapes.
Mind reading is not required. Any situation where this seems to be required should be a signal to walk away.
Women don't "put themselves in questionable circumstances". Rapists search out people to rape. Big difference.
how on earth does being celibate protect one from rape?
Since you assume many women who have sex after drinking are legally consenting and will try to rescind that consent after the fact, why don't you tell men to take some responsbilities for their choices in the face of this belief?
Why don't you tell men to never have sex with women who've been drinking and to never have sex outside of committed relationships? Then "the courts won't have to play guessing games"?
Men who want to use sex to hurt women will at most redirect their violence to more acceptable targets. Since women in prostitution already face a high risk of being murdered directing rapists toward them seems inhumane. That doesn't sound like what is best for all women.
Review the comment he said he rapes every time he goes to a bar.
by Skirt-Lifter November 10, 2009 1:55 PM EST
By your definition I have raped many, many women over the years, and they liked it ... well ... most of 'em anyway ... can't please 'em all.
I think, Bambi, that YOU should review the comment. If that is what you got from this statement, you need to go back to school.
I would think if he did have sex with her he would say they had consensual sex. But he is saying that he didn't have sex with her....so test the rape kit....let him prove his innocence.
Also, if she was out of it because of drinking or if he gave her something in her drink....it is still rape....she wasn't in any position to stop him....he took advantage of her and the situation and that is rape.....
And that is a lame excuse for not having the rape kit tested....because it wasn't winnable....how arrogant...we're not talking about wins and losses....we are talking about a human being that may have been raped and whose body has been violated...you are a prosecuting attorney not a judge to decide this outcome..do your own job....shame on you, Mr. Sanders