Idea for reducing rape

[Anonymous]

Be fair about defining it.

If two people get drunk and have sex, the one with the penis is legally a rapist. This is wrong, yet is completely accepted by feminists. Unfair laws ultimately lead to contempt for the law.

Also, we must define a clear standard for determining consent. There currently are none. All definitions of consent are ultimately circular: "a woman is able to give consent when she of sound mind to be able to give consent." There are no objective criteria. There is no magic LED that starts glowing when a woman is unable to give consent, yet we fully expect young men, who are typically drunk themselves, to be able to make this call.

Obviously, if she is passed out or slurring her speech, she is too drunk to consent, but if you are honest, you must admit that determining whether someone is able to give consent is not usually that clear cut and this is part of the problem. The rapists take advantage of this ambiguity and the non-rapists are usually inclined to give the rapists the benefit of the doubt because non-rapists fear being falsely accused of rape themselves.

[Anonymous]

Another problem is this:

When someone is accused of rape, both the accused and the accuser are thrust into a situation where in order for one to prevail, the other must be destroyed.

The reputation of both the accused and the accuser are both immediately damaged in the court of public opinion regardless of the truth and the outcome of the trial.

In the trial, the accuser will have her reputation questioned, and if she loses her legal battle, she could be ostracized as a false accuser. If the defendant is convicted, then obviously his reputation is destroyed, he faces serious prison time and a life of marginal existence afterwards.

By turning rape accusations in a public circus, we raise the stakes to a point where neither side can back down. The solution would be to lower the stakes for both parties, and the easiest way to do this is enact rape shield laws that cover both the accuser and the accused. There are currently rape shield laws that only cover the accuser, but they fail because the accused is not similar protected. If people know who is accused, they will quickly find out who the accuser is, and once they do, the gloves are off because there is no way to win with destroying the other party, or be destroyed yourself.

[Anonymous]

Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

But girls give affirmative consent and still accused boys of rape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

Sometimes even a verbal yes plus other evidence of consent isn't enough.

There is one case right now from Occidental College where college students got drunk, the "victim" left the boy's room with friends, she went back to his room after texting a friend that she was going to have sex with the boy and texting the boy to ask if he had a condom, and witnesses agree that the sex was consensual. However, the girl was "saving herself" and the next day regretted having drunken sex and after discussing the incident with a faculty advisor filed a complaint against the boy.

Despite all of the evidence and the active participation of the girl, the boy was still found to have violated the university's consent policy and expelled.

See http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

No, it's not that simple. She could be inebriated and say "yes." You're missing the whole point: consent is not a clearly defined thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

Sometimes even a verbal yes plus other evidence of consent isn't enough.

There is one case right now from Occidental College where college students got drunk, the "victim" left the boy's room with friends, she went back to his room after texting a friend that she was going to have sex with the boy and texting the boy to ask if he had a condom, and witnesses agree that the sex was consensual. However, the girl was "saving herself" and the next day regretted having drunken sex and after discussing the incident with a faculty advisor filed a complaint against the boy.

Despite all of the evidence and the active participation of the girl, the boy was still found to have violated the university's consent policy and expelled.

See http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

Yep. These incidents ultimately harm women by lowering the threshold for "rape" to a point that causes real victims to not be taken seriously.

Today, when I hear about a rape accusation, I honestly have to wonder what that means. In the past, it meant that someone was forced to have sex against their will. Today "rape" can be defined as "failure to obtain enthusiastic positive consent" which is an ludicrously broad standard that will only generate contempt and disregard for the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

Sometimes even a verbal yes plus other evidence of consent isn't enough.

There is one case right now from Occidental College where college students got drunk, the "victim" left the boy's room with friends, she went back to his room after texting a friend that she was going to have sex with the boy and texting the boy to ask if he had a condom, and witnesses agree that the sex was consensual. However, the girl was "saving herself" and the next day regretted having drunken sex and after discussing the incident with a faculty advisor filed a complaint against the boy.

Despite all of the evidence and the active participation of the girl, the boy was still found to have violated the university's consent policy and expelled.

See http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

Yep. These incidents ultimately harm women by lowering the threshold for "rape" to a point that causes real victims to not be taken seriously.

Today, when I hear about a rape accusation, I honestly have to wonder what that means. In the past, it meant that someone was forced to have sex against their will. Today "rape" can be defined as "failure to obtain enthusiastic positive consent" which is an ludicrously broad standard that will only generate contempt and disregard for the law.

You live in a scary place and I hope you have no position of power. Jesus. The number of people who give affirmative consent who are not impaired and then file rape charges is so ridiculously low that I don't even have words for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

Sometimes even a verbal yes plus other evidence of consent isn't enough.

There is one case right now from Occidental College where college students got drunk, the "victim" left the boy's room with friends, she went back to his room after texting a friend that she was going to have sex with the boy and texting the boy to ask if he had a condom, and witnesses agree that the sex was consensual. However, the girl was "saving herself" and the next day regretted having drunken sex and after discussing the incident with a faculty advisor filed a complaint against the boy.

Despite all of the evidence and the active participation of the girl, the boy was still found to have violated the university's consent policy and expelled.

See http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

Yep. These incidents ultimately harm women by lowering the threshold for "rape" to a point that causes real victims to not be taken seriously.

Today, when I hear about a rape accusation, I honestly have to wonder what that means. In the past, it meant that someone was forced to have sex against their will. Today "rape" can be defined as "failure to obtain enthusiastic positive consent" which is an ludicrously broad standard that will only generate contempt and disregard for the law.

You live in a scary place and I hope you have no position of power. Jesus. The number of people who give affirmative consent who are not impaired and then file rape charges is so ridiculously low that I don't even have words for you.

Indeed. Reminds me of voter fraud and third trimester abortions "on demand." Also, unicorns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

Sometimes even a verbal yes plus other evidence of consent isn't enough.

There is one case right now from Occidental College where college students got drunk, the "victim" left the boy's room with friends, she went back to his room after texting a friend that she was going to have sex with the boy and texting the boy to ask if he had a condom, and witnesses agree that the sex was consensual. However, the girl was "saving herself" and the next day regretted having drunken sex and after discussing the incident with a faculty advisor filed a complaint against the boy.

Despite all of the evidence and the active participation of the girl, the boy was still found to have violated the university's consent policy and expelled.

See http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

Yep. These incidents ultimately harm women by lowering the threshold for "rape" to a point that causes real victims to not be taken seriously.

Today, when I hear about a rape accusation, I honestly have to wonder what that means. In the past, it meant that someone was forced to have sex against their will. Today "rape" can be defined as "failure to obtain enthusiastic positive consent" which is an ludicrously broad standard that will only generate contempt and disregard for the law.

You live in a scary place and I hope you have no position of power. Jesus. The number of people who give affirmative consent who are not impaired and then file rape charges is so ridiculously low that I don't even have words for you.

But the number that are like the one in the article, two drunk kids ... Happens ever weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

Sometimes even a verbal yes plus other evidence of consent isn't enough.

There is one case right now from Occidental College where college students got drunk, the "victim" left the boy's room with friends, she went back to his room after texting a friend that she was going to have sex with the boy and texting the boy to ask if he had a condom, and witnesses agree that the sex was consensual. However, the girl was "saving herself" and the next day regretted having drunken sex and after discussing the incident with a faculty advisor filed a complaint against the boy.

Despite all of the evidence and the active participation of the girl, the boy was still found to have violated the university's consent policy and expelled.

See http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

You people live in a fantasy world. Every 2 minutes in America somebody is sexually assaulted. So if this "happens every weekend" bullshit has even a shadow of truth, it pales in comparison with the true rate of rape.

Yep. These incidents ultimately harm women by lowering the threshold for "rape" to a point that causes real victims to not be taken seriously.

Today, when I hear about a rape accusation, I honestly have to wonder what that means. In the past, it meant that someone was forced to have sex against their will. Today "rape" can be defined as "failure to obtain enthusiastic positive consent" which is an ludicrously broad standard that will only generate contempt and disregard for the law.

You live in a scary place and I hope you have no position of power. Jesus. The number of people who give affirmative consent who are not impaired and then file rape charges is so ridiculously low that I don't even have words for you.

But the number that are like the one in the article, two drunk kids ... Happens ever weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

Sometimes even a verbal yes plus other evidence of consent isn't enough.

There is one case right now from Occidental College where college students got drunk, the "victim" left the boy's room with friends, she went back to his room after texting a friend that she was going to have sex with the boy and texting the boy to ask if he had a condom, and witnesses agree that the sex was consensual. However, the girl was "saving herself" and the next day regretted having drunken sex and after discussing the incident with a faculty advisor filed a complaint against the boy.

Despite all of the evidence and the active participation of the girl, the boy was still found to have violated the university's consent policy and expelled.

See http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

There was an op-ed in the Washington Post a few weeks ago about just this type of thing, but it happened at Yale. Both the woman and the man were drunk, had consensual sex, but she regretted it the next day and filed a rape report. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ruth-marcus-in-sexual-assault-charges-dangers-for-male-and-female-alike/2014/11/11/16045622-69c8-11e4-a31c-77759fc1eacc_story.html The comments are well-worth a read too.

It's frightening and repulsive to think of our daughters being raped. But as the parent of girls AND boys, it's equally frightening to me to think of my son being falsely accused of rape by someone he had enthusiastic, consensual sex with but who later regretted it. A false accusation can ruin someone's life just as much as being raped can. I agree with the PP who stated false accusations of rape severely diminish the ability of a real rape victim to be taken seriously. Flame away, but it's the truth. My sons know not to rape, period. And my daughters know not to falsely accuse someone of rape.

[Anonymous]

Our policy should focus on preventing the vast majority of cases where a victim is (a) being assaulted, (b) intentionally placed in a condition where consent is impossible (i.e., drugs or a relatively sober attacker getting a victim drunk(er)), or (c) an attacker taking advantage of a condition where consent is not possible (i.e., a victim who is already seriously drunk or unconscious but not through the attacker's doing).

The vast majority of sexual assaults are just that - they are incidents where a person (usually a man) physically assaults or otherwise causes a woman to participate in sex without her consent. And those events have lifetime consequences for the victims, and they should have similar consequences for the perpetrators.

The problem in colleges is the grey area where something happens, a woman feels like the she was assaulted/violated, but there isn't enough evidence for legal prosecution. Our current environment is saying that traditionally colleges/universities have leaned too far towards protecting the men in those situations, erring on the side of not prosecuting/disciplining/expelling, and now because of public, media and government pressure, the pendulum is swinging the other way.

Now that it's swinging the other way, we're seeing a few cases of colleges/universities erring on the side of over-enforcement, like the Occidental case and a few others that have made the news. In the Occidental case, I believe, based on the facts that have been made public, the boy rightly assumed consent and the girl regretted the consensual sex the next day. Even though she began to have emotional issues about it, those were her issues to deal with. I believe Occidental wronged the boy by expelling him, and I think the courts will vindicate him and compensate him.

But we shouldn't be making policy based on circumstances like the Occidental case. Those are the exceptions, not the rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier solution: stop raping people. It's really not all that difficult. If you don't have affirmative consent, don't have sex. It's really simple.

X2. A verbal yes. Really simple and clear.

Sometimes even a verbal yes plus other evidence of consent isn't enough.

There is one case right now from Occidental College where college students got drunk, the "victim" left the boy's room with friends, she went back to his room after texting a friend that she was going to have sex with the boy and texting the boy to ask if he had a condom, and witnesses agree that the sex was consensual. However, the girl was "saving herself" and the next day regretted having drunken sex and after discussing the incident with a faculty advisor filed a complaint against the boy.

Despite all of the evidence and the active participation of the girl, the boy was still found to have violated the university's consent policy and expelled.

See http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

Yep. These incidents ultimately harm women by lowering the threshold for "rape" to a point that causes real victims to not be taken seriously.

Today, when I hear about a rape accusation, I honestly have to wonder what that means. In the past, it meant that someone was forced to have sex against their will. Today "rape" can be defined as "failure to obtain enthusiastic positive consent" which is an ludicrously broad standard that will only generate contempt and disregard for the law.

You live in a scary place and I hope you have no position of power. Jesus. The number of people who give affirmative consent who are not impaired and then file rape charges is so ridiculously low that I don't even have words for you.

But the number that are like the one in the article, two drunk kids ... Happens ever weekend.

Absolutely true. There were a few times in college when I had sex with guys and later regretted it. But rape? Not a chance. I was as enthusiastic at the time as they were, just made what was in retrospect, some stupid decisions. I would never have dreamed of accusing these guys of rape when, in the moment, I was just as eager as they. *And to be clear, I'm not talking about a situation in which I was attacked or forced into having sex.* Just your run-of-the-mill drunken hookup, which I was dumb to take part in but was in no way could be classified as rape.