Moms of sons - do you guide your son to be respectful of girls?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, all human interactions can lead to misunderstanding. We don't therefore ban human interactions. Nor do we require signed contracts before human interactions. Somehow everybody is able to figure this out countless times every single day -- except when it comes to sexual human interactions, at which point it apparently all becomes so complicated and nebulous that all of these poor pitiful well-meaning people are just completely at sea. I wonder why.

Also, grabbing somebody's arm actually is assault. So is hugging somebody who does not want to be hugged. Is it prosecutable assault, if so, should prosecutors prosecute it? Well, there are bigger fish to fry. Nonetheless, they are both assault. Don't do those things.

You just showed how ridiculous you are. Grabbing a persons arm and hugging someone depended on context and is not assault. In that case I am sure you have committed assault before. Exactly , there are bigger fish to fry. True incidents of rape, not these trumped up charges that everything is assault.

Yes, exactly. It does depend on context. Here is a guide:

Not assault: grabbing somebody's arm who consents to it; hugging somebody who consents to it.
Assault: grabbing somebody's arm who doesn't consent to it; hugging somebody doesn't consent to it.

I am pretty sure that you also agree that grabbing somebody's arm and/or hugging somebody can be assault. Or when some random person on the street grabs your arm/hugs you, do you think to yourself, "Well, I didn't tell them not to do that, so they couldn't have known I didn't want them to grab my arm/hug me."?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is talking about sexual authoritarian dystopia? Or evil, or retraining? It's very simple:

-if you want to have sex with a person, be sure they are consenting
-if you aren't sure that they are consenting, don't have sex with them

Also, you don't get to decide -- nobody gets to decide -- who the "real" rape victims are, vs. the fake rape victims.

Actually that is not true. The cops/courts decide who is the "real" rape victim.

That is, IF it even goes to court, which is unlikely. So many rapists get away with raoe, and they do it over and over again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is talking about sexual authoritarian dystopia? Or evil, or retraining? It's very simple:

-if you want to have sex with a person, be sure they are consenting
-if you aren't sure that they are consenting, don't have sex with them

Also, you don't get to decide -- nobody gets to decide -- who the "real" rape victims are, vs. the fake rape victims.

Actually that is not true. The cops/courts decide who is the "real" rape victim.

That is, IF it even goes to court, which is unlikely. So many rapists get away with raoe, and they do it over and over again.

Well, mostly it goes to the cops. Then they say, "Well that is not rape." So yes, it rarely gets to the court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is talking about sexual authoritarian dystopia? Or evil, or retraining? It's very simple:

-if you want to have sex with a person, be sure they are consenting
-if you aren't sure that they are consenting, don't have sex with them

Also, you don't get to decide -- nobody gets to decide -- who the "real" rape victims are, vs. the fake rape victims.

Actually that is not true. The cops/courts decide who is the "real" rape victim.

That is, IF it even goes to court, which is unlikely. So many rapists get away with raoe, and they do it over and over again.

Well, mostly it goes to the cops. Then they say, "Well that is not rape." So yes, it rarely gets to the court.

That is not even close to true. Women know they are the ones who will bear the brunt of speaking out, so they don't bother.

You know, I have a feeling that you are a creepy rapist yourself. I really do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is talking about sexual authoritarian dystopia? Or evil, or retraining? It's very simple:

-if you want to have sex with a person, be sure they are consenting
-if you aren't sure that they are consenting, don't have sex with them

Also, you don't get to decide -- nobody gets to decide -- who the "real" rape victims are, vs. the fake rape victims.

Actually that is not true. The cops/courts decide who is the "real" rape victim.

That is, IF it even goes to court, which is unlikely. So many rapists get away with raoe, and they do it over and over again.

Well, mostly it goes to the cops. Then they say, "Well that is not rape." So yes, it rarely gets to the court.

That is not even close to true. Women know they are the ones who will bear the brunt of speaking out, so they don't bother.

You know, I have a feeling that you are a creepy rapist yourself. I really do.

If you are not emotionally stable enough to discuss this then you should not post about it.

When a women believes she is raped, she goes to the cops (many don't, i know that) but many do and once they talk to the cops many realize that what they described is not a "real" rape.

[Anonymous]

When a women believes she is raped, she goes to the cops (many don't, i know that) but many do and once they talk to the cops many realize that what they described is not a "real" rape.

And we have a woman hater here, ladies and gents! This post is the most over the top piece of bullshit I have read on here yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

When a women believes she is raped, she goes to the cops (many don't, i know that) but many do and once they talk to the cops many realize that what they described is not a "real" rape.

Yes, for practical purposes, for rapes reported to the police, the police decide what is a "real" rape and what is a fake rape. That's why the police, on the whole, need better training about rape, so that they can make better decisions. See, for example, this article published in the journal Criminal Justice in 2004: http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Beyond_Belief__Police,_Rape_and_Women_s_Credibility.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When a women believes she is raped, she goes to the cops (many don't, i know that) but many do and once they talk to the cops many realize that what they described is not a "real" rape.

Yes, for practical purposes, for rapes reported to the police, the police decide what is a "real" rape and what is a fake rape. That's why the police, on the whole, need better training about rape, so that they can make better decisions. See, for example, this article published in the journal Criminal Justice in 2004: http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Beyond_Belief__Police,_Rape_and_Women_s_Credibility.pdf

Fascinating article. From p. 53 -

Police suspiciousness regarding rape allegations originates within a
social environment characterized by a history of distrust towards women,
and is exacerbated within the masculine ethos of police organizations

Yet more proof that women are raped too much and then are screwed by the system that should be helping them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

When a women believes she is raped, she goes to the cops (many don't, i know that) but many do and once they talk to the cops many realize that what they described is not a "real" rape.

And we have a woman hater here, ladies and gents! This post is the most over the top piece of bullshit I have read on here yet.

Not a woman or a man hater. Just a realist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When a women believes she is raped, she goes to the cops (many don't, i know that) but many do and once they talk to the cops many realize that what they described is not a "real" rape.

And we have a woman hater here, ladies and gents! This post is the most over the top piece of bullshit I have read on here yet.

Not a woman or a man hater. Just a realist.

Nah. A realist would actually acknowledge the article that was linked showing how you have no clue what you're talking about and make a real comment about it. You're just a troll, and a woman hating one at that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When a women believes she is raped, she goes to the cops (many don't, i know that) but many do and once they talk to the cops many realize that what they described is not a "real" rape.

And we have a woman hater here, ladies and gents! This post is the most over the top piece of bullshit I have read on here yet.

Not a woman or a man hater. Just a realist.

Nah. A realist would actually acknowledge the article that was linked showing how you have no clue what you're talking about and make a real comment about it. You're just a troll, and a woman hating one at that.

I am aware the police need more training.
I am also aware that they quite often get false reports, more often than not.
I actually think we need to educate women about what "real" rape is, because these false reports actually make it hard for police to trust women. They are working against themselves.

You are never going to get anywhere positive with this issue if you continue to believe that a couple getting drunk together then having consensual sex is rape on the part of 1 partner.

You are too far to the "everything is rape" side of the argument for anybody to take you serious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am aware the police need more training.
I am also aware that they quite often get false reports, more often than not.I actually think we need to educate women about what "real" rape is, because these false reports actually make it hard for police to trust women. They are working against themselves.

You are never going to get anywhere positive with this issue if you continue to believe that a couple getting drunk together then having consensual sex is rape on the part of 1 partner.

You are too far to the "everything is rape" side of the argument for anybody to take you serious.

False reports, more often than not? Oh boy.

Here is what "real" rape is -- sex without consent. The sooner everybody is clear about that, the better off everybody will be.

[Anonymous]

All this screaming about consent, yet still no clear definition what consent would mean. Once the poster said grabbing arm without consent could be sexual assault I lost interest. Sometimes I go up to my friend and before I say hello I grab her arm to get her attention. This can now be sexual assault. Insanity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All this screaming about consent, yet still no clear definition what consent would mean. Once the poster said grabbing arm without consent could be sexual assault I lost interest. Sometimes I go up to my friend and before I say hello I grab her arm to get her attention. This can now be sexual assault. Insanity.

I didn't say that grabbing somebody's arm without their consent is sexual assault. I said that it's assault. And unless you're fine with random people on the Metro grabbing your arm whenever they feel like it, you think it's assault too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sure, it's all very simple... among rational, level-headed people. Unfortunately, there are certain women who will claim after the fact that a sexual encounter wasn't consensual when it very much was, whether in a drunk stupor or heat of the moment or what-have-you. So it's very flippant and facile to say consensual sex is acceptable, until someone decides to throw out a false narrative, either out of regret, embarrassment, anger, etc. Of course we should be teaching our boys to be respectful of women and when no means no. But our girls absolutely need to know that false accusations are completely unacceptable and IMO, should be strictly sanctioned. Did anything ever happen to "Jackie," of UVA fame? Any apology from her?

If you were in a drunken stupor, you cannot consent to sex, in which case the sex was not consensual.

Also, if we stop at teaching boys when no means no, we are not teaching our boys (or our girls) about consent. The absence of no does not constitute consent. Only consent constitutes consent.

Again: someone can give their consent (enthusiastically, even!) and then recant the next day. How do you propose teaching girls just how wrong this is?

Do you disagree with the idea that the absence of no does not constitute consent? The assumption is that the person is consenting, unless the person explicitly no?

I'm not going to worry about how to teach girls not to "recant consent" after the fact, because it's not possible to recant consent after the fact. In contrast, disagreement about whether somebody consented is possible. For example, Person A might say, "Person B thought I was consenting, but I didn't consent". And then Person B might respond, "I thought that Person A was consenting because [reasons]." The way to avoid such disagreements is to only have sexual contact with people who are clearly consenting and aren't going to regret having had sex with you the next day.

Too bad there are some mentally unstable people out there who will think nothing of accusing their consensual sexual partner of rape, just because. What do you suggest in that case?