Letters to the Editor
-
READ THE FULL APPEAL!
he victim had already had sex with one guy, and after she asked the second guy to stop
READ THE FULL APPEAL!
The first guy, the co-defendant, plead guilty to rape. Then after he was done, the second guy pushed himself on her.
The prosecutor in the case brought up rape trauma syndrome to explain why she would have consented briefly to the second guy.
-
I Think This Falls Under The Category of
"The Difference Between A Jerk And A Rapist."
Because if a guy doesn't stop, it means he's probably just a guy you shouldn't call back.
Do you really think this guy in Maryland deserved to go to jail because a chick changed her mind during sex?
Also, this part makes you sound ridiculous: "What if the tenor of the encounter changes as soon as you say "yes"? Does that count as consensual? What if there is a hand over your mouth when sex begins? Is the sex consensual if you're unconscious, or have been drugged and wake up or come out of it in the middle of the act?"
That's called assault. That's like saying someone beats you up and then they have a right to steal cause you couldn't say no.
This guy's obviously an ass, but not deserving of going to jail.
-
The Reason This Pisses Men Off
Is because, from a physical point of view, rape is the same as sex. The only difference is in the mind. A couple could have violent consensual sex, and a man could rape a woman quietly. The reson we point out the problems with definitions of rape is that it leaves men open to being accused of rape by anyone they have sex with.
And an accused rapist is the same as a rapist in societies eyes.
Now, I don't think many women do this. But that they can is frightening, especially to readers of this blog, most of whom I'm going to guess aren't rapists and are probably feminists to some degree. It would be like waking up to find out you could be accused of stealing something without there needed to be any proof or even a stolen object other than that you had been in someone's house.
I've been in strangely opposite situations. I was at the end of a relationship with a girl. We'd mostly stopped having sex. She'd still walk around the house we lived in naked all the time, and I would, being a male, still try to have sex with her all the time. This would mostly lead to me eating her out, and as soon as she came, she would decide that she didnt' want to have sex anymore. So I'd be left there even more horny. Yes, I could have said no to doign anything to please her, but really, I have a penis, meaning that any sexual contact with a woman I'm attracted to is better than none. And while she didn't deserve to be raped (obviously), I think I had the patience of a saint not to turn into a mindless sex animal.
I think any woman on the brink of orgasm knows how much the body wants to finish once it has started.
-
Definition of rape is quick
If sex is nonconsensual, once penetration has occurred - it's rape. When I yell no! pull out quick, be really nice to me in any way I say, and hope it's enough. See ya in court.
-
news flash
This never happens to people who actually respect themselves first and then actually take their time getting to know and love and respect each other...before sex. Um, and that rarely happens between drinks and dessert, you assholes. Just like Dorothy in Oz, you dimwits have always had the power to get to know yourself very well first, then your partner. If you could admit the problem lies in the fact that you want to fuck on demand with no consequences you'd be halfway home to solving these problems you create when you choose to fuck on the fly. Think about it, if you dare to. Every problem about sexual relations arises from lack of communication, which is born of lack of self-respect. And it produces such fool's gold as Rebecca Traister urging women to "really think several times" before fucking that next stranger. Offered without irony. PLease, when the inmates are leading the asylum.....
-
Here's a simple, intuitive test
Rebecca, you really need to study some law before you start to opine on it. If you did, you would know that "if there is a hand over your mouth when sex begins," or "if you're unconscious," or if you "have been drugged," it would, yes, still be rape. It's the presence of consent to penetration -- verbal or not -- that negates rape.
The letter pointing out that, while it may not be rape if a woman changes her mind, an unreasonable delay in stopping sexual activity may still be battery is really the only one you need to read on this topic. But here's a test that you can use to analyze future hypotheticals like this.
Same situation, but, unbeknownst to the man having sex with her, the woman has a loaded gun lying within reach.
You can, in every jurisdiction I'm aware of, legally use deadly force to defend yourself against rape (though not necessarily against battery.) So: should the woman be able to shoot the man in the head in any of these situations if it's the only apparent way to get him to stop?
Didn't give consent to sex because hand over mouth? Yes.
Was unconsious or drugged when sex began and then regained consciousness? Yes.
Changed her mind and told the man to stop? Ummmm -- no.
Why? Partly because in that situation we may not sure that the message got across. (Men can be sort of preoccupied at moments like that.) Mostly because it is simply not reasonable. If the guy says "wait, I'll be done in ten seconds," is he committing a crime? Maybe. A crime for which allowable self-defense is shooting him in the head? No. (Let's remember, this could be your brother or your son here.) The longer the sex continues after permission is withdrawn, and the more unambiguous the direction to stop, and (if this applies) the more evident the physical harm being caused, the less reasonable the behavior is, and the more clearly it becomes a crime. That crime, however, is battery -- maybe aggravated battery in certain situations -- but not rape.
One can imagine, by the way, a scenario in which a woman may be having sex with a man lying on his back and he suddenly changes his mind. If he says "stop," should he be able to shoot her in the head if she doesn't immediately comply? (Imagine him handcuffed to the bed frame if it makes the example work for you.) No, he should not. It may be assault, but it isn't rape. But that it isn't rape doesn't make it even the least bit OK, for either gender.