7 ms·
> To make the point less gender political, view this as something which happens to a same-sex couple, so that the dynamics are less obvious about sexual politic
by CthulhuOvermind 10y ago
> To make the point less gender political, view this as something which happens to a same-sex couple, so that the dynamics are less obvious about sexual politics and more about either force, misinterpretation, or confusion or a mixture of all the above.
I like your suggestion about viewing this as same-sex couple situation. I wrote my post specifically gender-neutral so as to prepare for the inevitable accusation of sexism, and then reveal that in my example the female was the perpetrator. But I think your opinion is much better
- chris_wot 10y agoThough it's much rarer, it is possible for a woman to rape a man.
- danieltillett 10y agoIt is not that rare when using the current standard of consent. If you include any man who has sex while drunk (and is hence incapable of giving consent) then rape of men by women is very common.
- chris_wot 10y agoI could be wrong about how rare it is, I don't know the statistics and I don't have any way of knowing how many men don't report the crime. My point was that it can and does happen. I probably shouldn't have said anything about how often it occurs as I don't know.
- ZeroGravitas 10y agoCan you define drunk as you intend it in this sentence? People seem to be very loose with this phrase recently and it's impossible to tell if they're doing so intentionally for political reasons, or if they're just not very good at communicating what they mean. Drunk can mean someone has had 1 beer (e.g. drunk driving in many locations). It can also mean aggressively or flamboyantly out-of-character after several drinks, or it can mean basically incapacitated and in danger of choking on their own vomit. Which part of this range were you ambigously referring to?
- thaumasiotes 10y agoAs made explicit in the sexual assault policies of various US universities, a female is unable to consent if she's had any alcohol (the "1 beer" model of being drunk). It is not a defense, or grounds for a counterclaim, that the male might have been equally or more drunk. (I say made explicit; the "any alcohol" threshold is what's made explicit. The wording of formal policies is generally scrupulously gender-neutral, but their application isn't.) In an actual US criminal court, I believe drunken consent is no different from any other consent.
- emp_zealoth 10y agoWhat the actual fuck. Are those people out of their goddamn minds? So any girl can basically claim she had one shot if she feels like ruining someone's life and make an innocent man into a "rapist"? What if it's two lesbians that shared a beer? Do the universe collapse or something? The arbitraryness and possibilities of malicious abuse just blow my goddamn brain.
- chris_wot 10y agoWell, this is why it goes before a court. There needs to be proof or lack of reasonable doubt that the victim was intoxicated.
- emp_zealoth 10y agoExcept the article itself says "Seizing this logic, advocates for gender equality have persuaded the federal government, under civil-rights authority, to force higher-education institutions to investigate and punish crimes of sexual violence. Dozens of colleges are under investigation for failing to comply. Although not explicit in the rationale for this approach, the lower standard of proof required to bring campus disciplinary action—including expulsion—is surely attractive to antirape activists, as it is for other civil-rights advocates who pursue civil remedies." lower standard of proof disciplinary action including expulsion This is outright despicable. There already witch hunts going on in some unis (with NO actual filed complaints or charges)
- mirimir 10y agoWhat if both parties are incapable of giving consent?
- bitwize 10y agoThen each party is criminally liable for the rape of the other, under law. But, in practice, for heterosexual liaisons the male partner will be charged and prosecuted while the female goes free. Disclaimer: ianal
- sambe 10y agoTechnically, under English law, I believe it isn't. The definition involves penetrative sex. It's normally something like sexual assault instead (arguably adding somewhat to gender politics).
- mc32 10y agoIt's still not entirely impossible for a person without a male reproductive organ to engage in active penetrative sex with the aid of well, sexual devices which mimic the shape or even cruder devices. That's to say, I don't believe, but could be wrong, they stipulate being naturally born or some such uneasy language.
- sambe 10y agoI believe it actually requires a penis too. Quick Google suggests this is still true.
- chris_wot 10y agoNot true. The FBI's definition is: "The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim." [1] 1. https://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape https://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape
- maaku 10y agoFBI's definition does not apply in England.
- chris_wot 10y agoTrue, I missed the "English law" bit. This means the definition of rape depends on the country you are in. For the UK I think it's really arguing semantics though, because it is defined as "assault by penetration" and has the same penalties as rape. [1] 1. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/assault/section/2 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crosshead...
- chris_wot 10y agoI hope those who are disagreeing with me are doing so because I wasn't precise enough about where this can occur. As has been pointed out, in England a woman cannot take a man, but can commit an act of penetration. In the U.S. there is no such distinction.
- malandrew 10y agoIt actually occurs at a much higher rate than most think, but the strategy used by female perpetrators more often takes the form of emotional violence and coercion as opposed to physical violence. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01541620 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01541620 I have personal experience with this with a former partner and the threats and coercive tactics can get really ugly, dark and traumatic.
- JadeNB 10y ago> Though it's much rarer, it is possible for a woman to rape a man. Given that it is in response to a poster who clearly knew that (as indicated by the intention of revealing the female to be the perpetrator), in a thread in which (as far as I can see) no doubt about the possibility had been expressed, is this remark adding anything?
- anu_gupta 10y ago> n. I wrote my post specifically gender-neutral so as to prepare for the inevitable accusation of sexism, and then reveal that in my example the female was the perpetrator. Not really interested in engaging with someone who merely wants to set traps for people.
- chris_wot 10y agoI have to agree. Don't do that.
- techdragon 10y agoHave you never used something surprising as a method to make someone think? Laying traps is implying malice that may be entirely absent.
- chris_wot 10y agoI don't need to. I just state my position and hopefully then they consider it, which normally requires some level of thought.