Letters to the Editor
-
Very good. You figured out that no one is sayign a rape happened. And you fell for the trap of saying people are knocking her for wanting to have sex
No one is knocking her for her wanting to have wild sex. That's nonsense you are buying into to avoid looking at the real question:
If she chooses to have sex with people too drunk to reason does she bear responsibility for her acts?
You claim a jury would not excuse the drunk's behavior that may be so. But it is a double standard, and it is wrong, because she got into bed with them knowing, quoting Nick Kiddle, "that they were so drunk as to be deaf to reason."
Typically, the jury says the person that was not drunk bears responsibility. And actually the jury says both parties bear responsibility. The drunk driver and the barkeeper.
Why is it drunk rapists men bear responsibility, but not Nick Kiddle for taking them home?
If the two paratroopers got up the next morning and claimed that Nick Kiddle raped them, what would your response be?
Would you agree that if the paratroopers claimed she raped them, then by all definitions so far and case law, that she did in fact rape them?
But again, don't fall for the spin that people are upset with her wanting to have sex, unless you can show that.
-
It's the casual bigotry
That raises my own hackles. How did Ms. Traister put it?
"This is a tune Roiphe has been warbling for 14 years now, and it surely soothes those men who are sick of being told that sex is no longer theirs to take whenever they want it, that they have to share domestic duties, that they have to wear condoms to keep themselves and their partners safe."
This kind of generalized slur is so prevelant, and so often blindly accepted, in feminist discourse that it largely passes without comment by the faithful.
Were such a generalization to be made about another group (lesbians? blacks?) by a vile Republican, the screams for his/her head would be loud indeed.
"This is a tune that Jesse Jackson has been warbling for decades now, and it surely soothes those blacks who are sick of being told that they need to get off welfare, stop smoking crack, and quit committing any other offensive characterization that comes to mind."
Lacks a certain, well, generosity of spirit, doesn't it?
-
drunk sex vs rape
I'm saying right now I don't have an answer. But isn't there a difference here:
1. Two drunk people tearing each others clothes off and having sex.
2. One drunk person and one sober person. Both tearing each other's clothes off and having sex.
3. One drunk person and one sober person. The drunk person is tearing off of the sober person's clothes.
4. One drunk person and one sober person. The drunk person is tearing off of the sober person's clothes but the sober person is saying no and the drunk person forces the sober person into sex.
5. One drunk person and one sober person. The sober person is tearing off the drunk person's clothes while the drunk person is saying no and the sober person forces the drunk one into sex.
If the premise is that drunk people can't give consent, then who is the rapist (if any) in these situations. My best guess: is none in situations 1 - 3. The drunk person in situation 4 and the sober person in number 5. But if you can't give consent while intoxicated, how can you (legally) commit rape? Is there a difference between being able to give consent while intoxicated and being cupable for your actions while intoxicated? We put people in jail for committing crimes while drunk or high, and in fact we punish people more strongly for causing an accident while drunk instead of sober. If a drunk guy broke into your house and forced your daughter to have sex, would there be any question of this being rape, even though he was drunk? If not, then why does knowing each other change the situation? If you met someone at a bar and they were drunk and you flirted with them, but then left the bar and the drunk person grabbed you in the parking lot and forced you to have sex, is that more of a rape then if you kissed, or fondled or remove clothing...or what?
Anyway a funny (luckily only funny) story. My friend "Suzy", one night her housemate left their front door unlocked. Suzy was really tired and went to bed, she woke up several hours later when she heard her boyfriend get into the bed. She rolls over to say hi and give him a kiss goodnight. Lo and behold, it is not her boyfriend in her bed trying to spoon her, but some random drunk stranger. She turns on the light and says "what the hell do you think you're doing?" The guy looks around and realizes that this is not his house, not his room, not his bed and definitely not his girlfriend! He jumps up and starts freaking out and pleads for Suzy to not call the cops, he begs forgiveness and starts to panic. Suzy says "would you please get out of my house" (she said that she was too shocked to even be frightened). The guys responds "Lady, I would if I knew how!" She points him to the door and he runs out. She never figured out if he really was mistaken or if it was all an act and he really was some sort of perv. (The cops were called, but they didn't know either. There had been no other reports of this happening in the neighborhood, they did take a report and a description though) Moral of the story, of course, is to always make sure the front door is locked before you go to bed.
-
This paragraph blew me away:
"This is a tune Roiphe has been warbling for 14 years now, and it surely soothes those men who are sick of being told that sex is no longer theirs to take whenever they want it, that they have to share domestic duties, that they have to wear condoms to keep themselves and their partners safe. Don't worry, her books say. Not all of us want so much from you."
Who are these men? Do they wear signs so I can recognize them and stay away from them? "Sex is no longer theirs to take when they want it"? I don't think "don't rape me" is an unreasonable request to make of a man. There definitely are men who don't believe in the word no, but do we really have so little faith in the opposite sex as to believe that they're all complete brutes and criminals? And this paragraph follows one about how Roiphe doesn't want to demonize men. Color me baffled.