Originally Posted By ecdc <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/31/american-rape-column_n_520630.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...630.html</a> I thought this was an interesting story. Basically, a columnist in the school paper distinguished between date rape and "real rape" and said that if a girl goes to a party and gets drunk, it's not rape. At the risk of being despised, I think he has a point. I think he's crudely expressed it and oversimplified it somewhat, but I do think he has a point. Rape is one of those crimes that the moment someone is accused of it, it's all over. I think there is a big difference between a creep at a party who might take advantage of a girl who's passed out, and a violent offender who forcibly holds a woman down. The key difference is motive: while the guy at the party might be a real creepster, even a criminal for his behavior, he's basically a perv who probably had too much to drink himself and wants some sex. Conversely, violent criminals who rape strangers are all about power, domination, and control. It's not about the sex. It's about being in control when they usually aren't because they live meaningless lives. There is a difference. I'm in no way, shape, or form, excusing either behavior. But I do think there's more shades of gray when it comes to this than people would like to admit. But I'm happy to hear why I'm wrong.
Originally Posted By imadisneygal I don't think you're wrong that there are shades of gray. Both are criminal behavior and both need to be punished, but I do see a difference in the motive. I do not, however, think that the drunk woman is at fault in any case. Both parties are responsible for knowing (KNOWING, not assuming) that the person they are about to have sex with is consenting. If they are so drunk they cannot stand or form a sentence then they are not able to consent. I do see the difference you mention, but both crimes need to be punished and both take away a woman's right to consent.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***I think there is a big difference between a creep at a party who might take advantage of a girl who's passed out, and a violent offender who forcibly holds a woman down.*** Really? I don't think there's any difference whatsoever in what you just described. One being an unconscious person, the other conscious. Neither being in any way, shape, or form consensual. Do you REALLY think that's a position you want to stand by? If the situation were a drunk girl who was saying "yes", and then "no", and then "yes" again, I can understand your "shades of grey" argument, but a person who would rape an unconscious (or barely conscious) person is indeed a rapist in every sense of the word imho.
Originally Posted By Mr X Re post 2, I wonder if you'd say the same thing in the reverse. An extremely drunk guy has sex with a woman. Did she rape him?
Originally Posted By Mr X ***both crimes need to be punished and both take away a woman's right to consent*** This is the reason I wrote my comment above...why do you only take a woman's right to consent into consideration? If we're talking about people drunk beyond their faculties (and this is NOT about unconscious, or barely conscious, that's a whole different story as far as I'm concerned), then why is it exclusively women who are victimized and men the criminals in these cases?
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones From my point of view, I never went to those parties anyway. I worked and studied hard instead. They can all go to hell.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones By not going to those parties, I'm sure I avoided a lot of drama in my life and I'm happy for that.
Originally Posted By imadisneygal Regarding it being the other way around, it's absolutely rape if one or both of the parties is unable to consent. That goes for men and women. And an erection is not consent even though that much alcohol will sometimes make that reaction impossible.
Originally Posted By mele I will say that being drunk/blacking out and getting raped IS different in the fact that there is probably a lot more guilt for the victim. It's likely that the victim doesn't have as many mental images/memory of the attack...so maybe the experience isn't as traumatic. Maybe the victim doesn't feel quite as unsafe walking down the street. There are no real black and white answers with this but the feelings of being violated are still there and are extremely damaging. I see no reason to split hairs about definitions.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By DAR <<An extremely drunk guy has sex with a woman.>> Extremely drunk?? That usually doesn't happen, there's a phrase but I can't exactly repeat it here.
Originally Posted By Labuda I think we're all adults in this section, DAR. So, is whiskey dick what you're referring to?
Originally Posted By Mr X *facepalm* Labuda, sweetheart, we ALL know your feeling your muscle after going after the troll in nasty fashion....but, save it for when it counts, ne? ;p
Originally Posted By Mr X Also, I thought ladies weren't aware of that, never mind SAYING it!! <--for the record, never happens
Originally Posted By Labuda I first heard the term from a male friend, I think. But, yeah, I've heard of it.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Dick_Mountain" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...Mountain</a> There's a Whiskey Dick Mountain near Ellensburg, WA. There's a huge wind farm near there. I don't know what that means.
