American Women need Sexual Freedom, Instead of Victimizing Themselves

[AmayaOnnaOtaku]

I have some MAJOR issues with your post. First you are generalizing rape and molestation victims. Have you EVEN talked to one?

When I was raped I was not drinking, I was 16 a virgin and the the guy was stronger than me. I wasn't wearing anything slutty. Rape is about power, and control.

Coercion: Ever think the person may have been in an abusive relationship? Where if the woman doesn't person sexually she gets hurt physically or otherwise?

Molestation: Most molestation cases aren't that is an older person: friend of the family, family member, sibling, clergy, teacher, or parent.

Please look up the facts before you run off your mouth about something you have NO knowledge about

Calm down, it's quite clear he's referring to highly specific circumstances. The fact that you were not drinking and did not give your consent then take the consent back later when you regretted sleeping with someone completely removes you from the hypothetical scenario he's laid out.


Molestation, in fact, you're the one generalising here.

WRONG

The molestations victims I have known (my cousin and others) Plus my family has done work with CASA for over 30 years and I have sat in on molestation cases. Any of them kids in the schoolyard? NOPE It's been someone in authority taking advantage of their power. Like I said go down to the local CASA or talk to a victim's right advocate.

 

[Odbarc]

Sexual repression for us all!

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

No. Did you ever see a man press rape charges on a woman for the being "taken advantage off while intoxicated"?
If you have an example, please bring me a link. If you haven't, it proves that it is entirely out of social stigma: "women having casual sex is wrong".

About 100% of all guys become flaccid after drinking too much. That's why a man that's too drunk can't be taken advantage off in the same way as an over-intoxicated woman can be (unless the perpetrator is homosexual. And guess what, that happens quite a lot, that men press charges against other men for having raped them after they drank too much).

That has to do with self-esteem issues, as mentioned in the OP. He says he will leave you if you don't do X? Then leave him
A girlfriend once told me to stop hanging out with my friends as much, and spend more time with her. That would be fine, if I wasn't already fed up with her constantly demanding attention.

So I left her, you know? Broke up.

It has to do with self-esteem and reliance on the other part of your relationship. Your partner will make such demands of you ("Do X, or I will do Y") in an effort to advantage of you... Not of your body, but of your low self-esteem. It is manipulation, and not a very subtle form of it.

This, again, is about victimizing oneself. Get up, instead, and fight for your right. You can again call the act morally reprehensible, but surely it can't be illegal?

How about something like "You won't get out of this room unless you give me a blowjob"? Or "I'll beat you up so bad you won't be able to stand up unless you have sex with me"? Perhaps something along the lines of alcohol mixed with veiled threats and constant nagging until the girl gives in. Some of it has to do with self-esteem, but most types of coercion into sex is simply about the perpetrator using his social status, physical strentgh or similar advantage to get the victim to do as the perpetrator wants.

I think you're misunderstanding "sexually aggressive".
"Sexually aggressive" doesn't equal "Raping/Groping/Molesting/Whatever". It simply means looking upon the option of having sex without any social stigma. It means you can have sex with whoever you want, because you (and your sex as a whole) isn't sexually repressed.

Your solution is basically like suggesting that planting a few trees might save the rainforest from de-forestation. Women doesn't feel like victims of rape because they can't have sex like they want to (and recent studies here in Sweden has shown that teenage guys has just as hard a time with casual sex as teenage girls do, so this is hardly a social stigma), but because they have been violated sexually. The number of girls "faking" rape to get out of an awkward social position is very low compared to the number of girls that are actually raped.

My point is, then, that women can only stop feeling like victims, when they stop thinking of themselves as potential victims rather than equally sexually aggressive.

And my point is that we feel like victims because we are victims, not out of some sort of misguided self-pity about not being able to fuck around unhindered. A violation is a violation is a violation, no matter how much or how little I fuck around otherwise. When someone forces you into having sex with them, that's a rape no matter how sexually liberated or promiscuous I usually am.

I see where you are coming from, but the tl dr for you is this: You are wrong. And even in the cases where you are right this isn't as easy as "Womaning up!" and getting some promiscuity going on. Because in the cases you are right there are usually plenty of personal, social and sociological reasons as to why the women feel "victimzed". Perhaps that would be a better place to start, in changing the mindset of the onlookers instead of the victims.

 

[Shycte]

I agree that victimizing the women is huge problem, and it is not just the issues you addressed, it's everywhere in society.

I blame the socialist-feminists for the issue here in Sweden atleast. Shit be insane man, Mary Wollstonecraft in turning in her grave.

That's not to say that rape and all that isn't terrible and OF COURSE there exist real victims. It's something society has to work with.

 

[Stasisesque]

Molestation, in fact, you're the one generalising here.

WRONG

The molestations victims I have known (my cousin and others) Plus my family has done work with CASA for over 30 years and I have sat in on molestation cases. Any of them kids in the schoolyard? NOPE It's been someone in authority taking advantage of their power. Like I said go down to the local CASA or talk to a victim's right advocate.

Are you referring to child molestation? That isn't what is being discussed in the OP. The OP mentions playground games in which "inappropriate touching" takes place, not child abuse - these are two vastly, vastly different animals. It then goes on to talk about groping, the act of someone's unwanted sexual touching - something that can either become sexual battery, or be shrugged off as an unpleasant element of a night out.

Child abuse, yes, I'd agree in that the majority of cases do appear to involve a trusted family member, friend or person of authority - but that simply is not what is being discussed.

 

[Zeriah]

A person who is intoxicated is not able to give consent, because intoxication impairs mental faculties. That should be really obvious. You're not allowed to drive while intoxicated, you'd get fired if you turned up to work drunk, you'd be in serious trouble if called as a witness in a court and turned up drunk. The same logic applies.

If a person cannot give consent, then having sex with them is sex without consent.

That seems like a really dumb argument to me. With this kind of logic you could almost make having sex, rape in any circumstance. Too stressed out from work? Too tired? Too hot? Sick? Moody? These are all things that impair judgment and you are bound to be afflicted by at least one of these at all times. Lets also not forget we are talking about two drunk people here, the man could just as easily turn it around on the woman and said she raped him. I mean if we are talking in the very limited, hypothetical scenario laid out in the OP, it is just you're average, non sex predator guy and girl at a bar. They have just met, the man has no idea of the extent of the woman's intoxication. The woman is probably sober enough to have conscious thought and can still make decisions (even if it may be different to what she normal does). At the time it is very consensual but she wakes up the next day thinks she made a mistake (like a whole lot of people - men and women alike) and suddenly it's rape? At what point is the guy at fault here?

If we counted all cases (males included) of sex while intoxicated and called it rape, you would be looking at tens of thousands of cases per day.

Of course the perpetrator is at fault. You can argue whether or not it constitutes rape, but you are talking about a man getting a woman to do something she doesn't want to do, simply for his own pleasure. That doesn't seem morally dubious to you? You don't see why woman might feel unhappy if they give in to that?

In some situations, sure the perpetrator is at fault. But you know in most stable, loving relationships this type of thing happens all the time. The girl might be a bit tired, doesn't really feel like it at first so she says no, but perhaps later after a back rub from the guy decides to just give him an old fashion as a loving gesture? You must know how often this type of thing happens, this is the type of situation the OP is talking about and if the girl really didn't feel like it she should have said no (again we are talking about normal relationships here where the guy wont threaten to leave you, beat you, abduct your kid etc but instead say 'k' and fall asleep). Abusive relationships are a completely different story!

 

[Blitzwarp]

I have some MAJOR issues with your post. First you are generalizing rape and molestation victims. Have you EVEN talked to one?

When I was raped I was not drinking, I was 16 a virgin and the the guy was stronger than me. I wasn't wearing anything slutty. Rape is about power, and control.

Coercion: Ever think the person may have been in an abusive relationship? Where if the woman doesn't person sexually she gets hurt physically or otherwise?

Molestation: Most molestation cases aren't that is an older person: friend of the family, family member, sibling, clergy, teacher, or parent.

Please look up the facts before you run off your mouth about something you have NO knowledge about

I'm not a rape victim, but I agree with this post.

The OP shows a remarkable lack of sympathy toward rape victims, instead crying about how 'innocent' men are instead victimised by women who cry rape or who are drunk. The solution that women ought to stop victimising themselves is laughable - a lot of women do not report any sexual molestation as it is, because they're scared of views like this. Do some research that doesn't include anaecdata from your average college campus, then come back. :/

 

[Stasisesque]

No. Did you ever see a man press rape charges on a woman for the being "taken advantage off while intoxicated"?
If you have an example, please bring me a link. If you haven't, it proves that it is entirely out of social stigma: "women having casual sex is wrong".

About 100% of all guys become flaccid after drinking too much. That's why a man that's too drunk can't be taken advantage off in the same way as an over-intoxicated woman can be (unless the perpetrator is homosexual. And guess what, that happens quite a lot, that men press charges against other men for having raped them after they drank too much).

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and believe you simply forgot to include these points - but for the sake of no one else pouncing on this point like a dog in heat:

A man unable to maintain an erection can be raped by man or woman. Penile penetration absolutely does not need to take place for rape to have been committed. Any unwarranted sexual act classes as rape, regardless of flaccidity.

 

[s0denone]

I'm not exactly sure how you thought this wouldn't be offensive, but I'll assume you're not simply trolling. All these points are commonly brought up by rape apologists and those claiming women would be liberated if they had the sole option of choosing whatever they happened to think those women should be like, and as such have been refuted by better people than me all across the net, but I'll share my thoughts.

What? How am I a "rape apologist"? How do I appear to want to choose how women should be like?
I am offering my view-point on a lot of things that is *not* "rape" as defined by the definition in my opening remarks(And Danish law). These things do come into play in America, however, and I am offering thoughts on why that could be the case.

A person who is intoxicated is not able to give consent, because intoxication impairs mental faculties. That should be really obvious. You're not allowed to drive while intoxicated, you'd get fired if you turned up to work drunk, you'd be in serious trouble if called as a witness in a court and turned up drunk. The same logic applies.

No. That's not true at all.
You're not allowed to drive drunk because it has physical implications, not because it has mental ones.
Drunk on the job? You are less productive (and obviously irresponsible) and fired because of that.
Witness in court and turned up drunk? Wow, I've never heard of that. I guess it would be morally dubious, but not illegal? I don't really know what to think there.

However, to your main point here, that:

If a person cannot give consent, then having sex with them is sex without consent.

And that a person cannot give consent while under the influence of alcohol.

Okay, then. Let us look at what you're saying:
A woman can get extremely drunk(to the point of her not knowing what she is doing or saying), and then give her consent while drunk(which then isn't valid) - and when she wakes up with an enormous hangover, she can press charges on the man who had sex with her, who she would otherwise not have slept with because she was irrespensible and got very drunk?

I'm sorry, but I don't see the logic in that at all. The woman decides herself to get drunk, knowing that she will potentially do something she regrets - you know, because everyone do stuff they would rather regret, when they are drunk... And then she can hold others responsible?

I mean... Really!?

Of course the perpetrator is at fault. You can argue whether or not it constitutes rape, but you are talking about a man getting a woman to do something she doesn't want to do, simply for his own pleasure. That doesn't seem morally dubious to you? You don't see why woman might feel unhappy if they give in to that?

It seems extremely morally dubious.
I am not arguing the morality of the action, but the mindset of the victim. The victim wasn't "raped", the victim was taken advantage off, because said victim had low self-esteem.

There is a vast difference for me, there.

So...you believe in women's equality, but you believe the reason they don't have it is cause of the silly ways women think? Unfortunately, you're not alone in that.

That is not what I'm saying at all.

So, it's women's fault they get sexually harassed and to combat this, they should become libersted by behaving the way men think they should? You don't see something odd there.

What!?!??!
"Liberated by behaving the way men think they should"
?????????
NO!
I never, ever claimed it was the victims(in the case a woman) fault.
I merely offered thoughts on why it is such a "problem". As stated, in the whole bunch of text you quoted, I think it is because woman victimze themselves, that they feel like victims. If they stopped thinking they were potential victims, but instead saw themselves as equal in every way, especially a sexual way, they wouldn't be bothered by these things as much as they are... Or I should clarify: As much as those blogs I have read, are.

So, it's the fault of women that they are victims of men? If women would just roll over and enjoy what is happening to them, the problem would go away? What a startling and original observation.

Here's a thought though, you don't think it might be better to condemn the perpetrator, and not the victim? You know, just for a change.

Please read above.

Ok, I get that you said you are a supporter of equality, and maybe you believe that you believe that. But you don't come off as that convincing when you follow the uusual path of victim-blaming or denying.

Victim-blaming?
????
Will you please highlight in my text where I am doing that, so I can clarify my position.
If you think I am supporting rape in any way shape or form, or an any way fine with anyone being molested/raped/otherwise you have misunderstood my post entirely.

I am not talking about "rape" in the classical sense, and the thread isn't about the actions themselves, as about the mindset of the victim.

It's an alien concept I know (not being sarcastic, it really is), but not that complicated. If women are equal to men, then they are men's equals. That is, you don't ignore problems just because they tend to happen to women. You don't ignore women's experiences because they are women. You don't blame women for what men do to them. Women do not become liberated by getting them to be what men want. And most importantly, women do not need men to tell them how women's problems should be solved.

How I am telling anyone to do anything? Please highlight with quotes.
I agree entirely that women are mens equals - in fact I started this thread in an effort to make it even more so, and that so being in the "sexually aggressive" department.

Yes, almost certainly you'll totally ignore everything I've said, because you know you know better. You know everything about equality of the sexes, because you're a man. But every time I come across someone who has written the same old stuff, I take the time and respond because maybe this time someone will take the effort (and I admit, it's a hell of an effort) to stop and think about what they know they know.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I will not ignore anything you say because you are a woman. I'm even more sorry that I appear to come off as some sort of malechauvinist. I would be offended at the notion, if not for the fact that you appear to misunderstood my position entirely.

Note: Gethsemani, reply coming your way asap.

Really? Damnit, guess that means no barfly's for me then, i don't drink.

OTne of the reasons for this is that its against the law to raise children... seriously look at the legal system- you can go to jail for touching someone.
i'll show you what i mean:
the typical school-age american girl knows a few things: how to read, how to open cans,how to swear, how to spend money and that if they fight someone they could get expelled and/or arrested and (presumeably) scolded.
seriously even if you take a martial art to learn something about defending yourself- stomping a groper or indeed even an attack by a fellow student will earn you nothing but scorn in this day and age because all it leads to is some satisfaction that borders on extacy and court dates.
it has in part to do that parents arn't raiseing their children but the fact that schools enable one-sided bullying unless you tell them about it- (which i assume is embarrising as it takes all control of the situation from you for the next 20 minutes at the least.) or it gets physical and to respond with such EXTREMES that are borederline retarded.
I remember a story that was related to me about my district suspending a couple of boy's for playing cowboys and indians.... truely the enviroments we grow up in are not the same my good man.
Authors note: above statement about general knowlage that every woman is expected to know within the province of north america and is the olny things i could think of that- situationaly and educationaly speaking most people should know. it is not ment to undermind the inteligence of girls.

Also: Puppies, i like puppies

I'm sorry, but I don't think I understand what you are talking about.
Bad parenting is in not raising your child properly? I think that is an interesting thing to include. Ingrained social stigma is certainly being passed from parent to child as much as from society as a whole. More sexually liberated parents -> more sexually liberated children.

The trouble is, you've been reading feminist blogs. The majority of those are insane, and most of them just want to show how much they hate men without saying that they really just hate men.

Indeed - but when there are laws in place that make, for instance, a woman pressing charges for a man having sex with her on a night out viable... Then there must be some sort of general consesus, right?
I realise that feminists are extremist in this regard, but some of their points obviously carries legal weight.

 

[xmbts]

No. Did you ever see a man press rape charges on a woman for the being "taken advantage off while intoxicated"?
If you have an example, please bring me a link. If you haven't, it proves that it is entirely out of social stigma: "women having casual sex is wrong".

It happens I'm sure, I don't have an example but lets look at it rationally if you wake up next to a stranger who talked you into sex while you were drunk it's plausible that at some point you'd feel taken advantage of and then from there it gets blown out of proportion.

That has to do with self-esteem issues, as mentioned in the OP. He says he will leave you if you don't do X? Then leave him
A girlfriend once told me to stop hanging out with my friends as much, and spend more time with her. That would be fine, if I wasn't already fed up with her constantly demanding attention.

So I left her, you know? Broke up.

It has to do with self-esteem and reliance on the other part of your relationship. Your partner will make such demands of you ("Do X, or I will do Y") in an effort to advantage of you... Not of your body, but of your low self-esteem. It is manipulation, and not a very subtle form of it.

This, again, is about victimizing oneself. Get up, instead, and fight for your right. You can again call the act morally reprehensible, but surely it can't be illegal?

You have no idea what some people will do to avoid being alone, and it's not just an American woman thing either. And I don't know much about other parts of the world, but here you can press charges against anything for making you feel bad it's really kind of sad when you think about it.

I think you're misunderstanding the point entirely here. I'm not defending any kind of "groping" and find all of it equally disturbing. I am just offering a Danish point of view on why it may be such a problem in the U.S.(and I even add Japan at the end), and not Denmark.

It's about repressed sexuality. That's my take on it, anyway.

I didn't think you were defending it, I just think there's alot of gray area that goes with it, if someone grabs your ass wouldn't you feel a bit more uncomfortable if they kept it there?

Sexuality is a bit more taboo here sure, but feminist articles are far from unbiased accounts on it.

 

[Blitzwarp]

You're not allowed to drive drunk because it has physical implications, not because it has mental ones.

I'm pretty sure it does have mental implications considering that, oh, alcohol kills brain cells. Unless my brain cells are located anywhere other than my brain and my biology classes have been wrong all of these years, I'd say destroying brain cells = damage to the brain = mental incapacitation = inability to form coherent decisions.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

It is weird.

Few examples from my own life.

Got really drunk one night and started making out with a rather... em rotund girl. She tried to take me home, luckily I was so hammered I wandered off because I had no clue what was happening. Now, needless to say no one's accusing her of trying to rape me. When a guy wakes up after a few to many and sees chewbacca the wookie next to him it's comedy gold. When the same thing happens to a woman it's rape apparently.

In tghe same nightclub (man I got to stop going there). I was out having a smoke. I was wearing a v neck shirt and some woman who looked to be in her forties cam up and put her hand down my shirt and then said she just wanted to see my chain. Again, no one thinks I was molested. In fact most people think it's one of the funniest thing's they've ever heard.

that is hilarious.

i literally lol'd at both of those. (and they are both true)

OT: long ass post, but you kept it chopped up good so i actually read the damn thing.
this problem will go on and on and on for near ever i would say..i dont know if its truly a problem that can ever be fully abolished, no matter what country your in.

 

[Gigano]

...
Sex crimes will never vanish. You should be mindful that this thread is only talking of "rape" in the sense it (may) be classified as, in the U.S. I am not talking of rape bearing the definition I mention in my opening remarks.

I am talking about women feeling like victims (feeling violated, raped, etc.) due to things that aren't in the slightest problems in Denmark.

My point is, then, that women can only stop feeling like victims, when they stop thinking of themselves as potential victims rather than equally sexually aggressive.
...

I think the prevalent consequence of sex being taboo is that missteps are kept silent rather than taken before the courts on a false claim of lack of consent at the time. Though it did of course happen - in Denmark - a while back when that girl who sold herself for a bus ticket pressed rape charges against 3 immigrant boys, who were only cleared when she admitted making it up on hidden camera.

That takes a level of fucked-up well beyond the vast majority of Danish women though, and I doubt any significant portion of "American women" either think that lying about being raped is the way to go with morning after regrets.

So while this could be a legal problem - for the men they sleep with - it's hardly all that widespread. A fringe argument perhaps, but the main argument for liberalization should be the freedom and enjoyment (some) of the many many women would derive from it, not that it might play a causal role in ever so rarely getting men in trouble.

 

[Stasisesque]

You're not allowed to drive drunk because it has physical implications, not because it has mental ones.

I'm pretty sure it does have mental implications considering that, oh, alcohol kills brain cells. Unless my brain cells are located anywhere other than my brain and my biology classes have been wrong all of these years, I'd say destroying brain cells = damage to the brain = mental incapacitation = inability to form coherent decisions.

Your biology classes have been wrong all these years...

Alcohol doesn't kill brain cells, it damages the way the cells interact with one another - slowing motor function etc. You are right on this issue, in that your reflexes are slowed, your capacity to make decisions quickly is impaired and such but, well, I'm just being anal about it really.

 

[Blitzwarp]

You're not allowed to drive drunk because it has physical implications, not because it has mental ones.

I'm pretty sure it does have mental implications considering that, oh, alcohol kills brain cells. Unless my brain cells are located anywhere other than my brain and my biology classes have been wrong all of these years, I'd say destroying brain cells = damage to the brain = mental incapacitation = inability to form coherent decisions.

Your biology classes have been wrong all these years...

Alcohol doesn't kill brain cells, it damages the way the cells interact with one another - slowing motor function etc. You are right on this issue, in that your reflexes are slowed, your capacity to make decisions quickly is impaired and such but, well, I'm just being anal about it really.

You know, I still have two of my biology textbooks from GCSE, and I just went over to check them and they both read as "kills braincells."

...brb suing my science teacher. >:[

 

[Stasisesque]

You're not allowed to drive drunk because it has physical implications, not because it has mental ones.

I'm pretty sure it does have mental implications considering that, oh, alcohol kills brain cells. Unless my brain cells are located anywhere other than my brain and my biology classes have been wrong all of these years, I'd say destroying brain cells = damage to the brain = mental incapacitation = inability to form coherent decisions.

Your biology classes have been wrong all these years...

Alcohol doesn't kill brain cells, it damages the way the cells interact with one another - slowing motor function etc. You are right on this issue, in that your reflexes are slowed, your capacity to make decisions quickly is impaired and such but, well, I'm just being anal about it really.

You know, I still have two of my biology textbooks from GCSE, and I just went over to check them and they both read as "kills braincells."

...brb suing my science teacher. >:[

Yeah, a lot of what they teach you at GCSE turns out to be... not 100% accurate. Not wrong, just a sort of dumbed down version to get you interested in the subject. I fully endorse suing your teachers though, for any reason.

 

[zehydra]

I have some MAJOR issues with your post. First you are generalizing rape and molestation victims. Have you EVEN talked to one?

When I was raped I was not drinking, I was 16 a virgin and the the guy was stronger than me. I wasn't wearing anything slutty. Rape is about power, and control.

Coercion: Ever think the person may have been in an abusive relationship? Where if the woman doesn't person sexually she gets hurt physically or otherwise?

Molestation: Most molestation cases aren't that is an older person: friend of the family, family member, sibling, clergy, teacher, or parent.

Please look up the facts before you run off your mouth about something you have NO knowledge about

He clearly DID have knowledge, and he the situations he was talking about weren't the one's you've mentioned.

 

[drisky]

I really don't think there much of a need for women to let sexual aggression against them slide. Sure they can take pride in there sexuality, but if the want noting to do with it they should be protected. America actually feels that we have a much bigger problem with women not coming forward when sexually abused, because there afraid of how people will view them. Id also like to make points on your specific areas of where people need to lighten up. If a girl is drunk, its your responsibility to show a little restraint, you can still make good judgments, she can't. With coercion, anybody has the right to change there mind about sex, at anytime if they say they want to stop you have to stop, they can't just say they changed there mind in there head and sue, although what people said is difficult to prove. And people shouldn't be touched if they don't want too, I think its good to have a right to our own boundaries. In the end I don't think that sexually aggression is some sort of key to equality.