American Women need Sexual Freedom, Instead of Victimizing Themselves
- Thread starter s0denone
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Just thought of a great corrolary for this whole issue, except with the male as the "victim".
If a man accidentally gets a woman pregnant while drunk then he has no responsibility to support that child, either financially or with care, should the woman choose to keep the baby.
You can't argue against that and not argue against the "drunken decision to have sex = rape".
One is law, the other has a law stating the opposite; where is the consistency?
If a man accidentally gets a woman pregnant while drunk then he has no responsibility to support that child, either financially or with care, should the woman choose to keep the baby.
You can't argue against that and not argue against the "drunken decision to have sex = rape".
One is law, the other has a law stating the opposite; where is the consistency?
That doesn't exactly solve the problem. Now you're telling me that you have a response, but you expect me to go digging around for it. That tells me you aren't terribly invested in responding to MY argument, which makes me wonder why you bothered responding at all. If you are tired of posing the same argument again and again, then I'd perfectly understand. I've done it before--just don't respond. We all have better things to be doing than staging anonymous word-battles on the Internet.s0denone said:
No, I didn't. However, I did read your bit about how groping "isn't that big of a deal" and that you don't seem to think women react to it correctly. What you seem to forget is everybody is different, and everybody will react differently in those confrontational situations. I know some girls who do NOT do confrontation. It's just their nature. What I'm getting here is that you're saying if a woman doesn't have the constitution or confidence to fight back and express her distaste then it's her own fault, which is wrong. Just because someone got mugged and didn't have the will to fight back doesn't mean it's the same as giving their stuff to the mugger of their own free will.
Everyone has the right to feel safe and present their grievances to a court of law, or at least that's how I feel, here in America. And if I interpreted that incorrectly, please feel free to correct me.
You seem to have a very far outsiders perspective on things, which I can understand considering you live in Denmark. The big stories you hear on the news about women being "coerced" are big for a reason--they're easy. It's easy to peg the guy as the villain and the woman as the damsel in distress, and the media eats that sort of thing up. Plus it's sort of a gray area, which leaves plenty of room for people on the news/talk shows to debate and yell at each other.
I'm in college, and I know plenty of girls who have casual sex on an almost weekly basis. They get drunk and hook up with random guys. They rarely call "rape" because 1. they were drinking underage and 2. that is exactly why they went out and drank around a bunch of guys. The cases you are speaking of are a minority, highlighted by the media and made out to be the majority.
Sure there are plenty of BS sexual assault cases out there, but that's just sort of how America is right now. People look for any and every way to get someone in trouble and get millions in compensation out of them. It's sad, and as you've pointed out, it's especially easy for women to do. Just look at the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case from a few years ago.
I have noticed that I did misinterpret a couple of things you originally said because I wasn't interested in swallowing that block of text in one bite, but to me it's still not totally fair for you to target just the women in this. From personal observation down here, I think this is less of a "sexual liberation" problem than you seem to think. It's more of a "teaching people to not sue or criminally accuse over everything for money and headlines" problem.
Lastly, I am sorry that my post distraught you so much. It seems I didn't quite understand what you said, either. Hopefully we can wrap this up in a non-aggressive manner
I don't think gender matters when it comes to taking home drunk people. I'm a female and I have been drunk-ish myself and turned down a wasted super hot guy cause I knew it was wrong. I don't think it's illegal wrong, it's douchebag wrong.
Also I have never heard a woman say "I was coerced" or "He coerced me into". Nope. Maybe he lied to me, but it wasn't he lied to me therefore I have been raped. It was he lied to me, what a *****.
Part of being sexually free is the right to say no. The right to not be groped. Seriously lots of north american chicks will freak out if you grab them too. Really they aren't all shrinking violets just as I doubt the women there are all super outgoing and sexually aggressive. I think your sources might be a bit extreme, so they might not give you a realistic view of what it's really like.
Also I have never heard a woman say "I was coerced" or "He coerced me into". Nope. Maybe he lied to me, but it wasn't he lied to me therefore I have been raped. It was he lied to me, what a *****.
Part of being sexually free is the right to say no. The right to not be groped. Seriously lots of north american chicks will freak out if you grab them too. Really they aren't all shrinking violets just as I doubt the women there are all super outgoing and sexually aggressive. I think your sources might be a bit extreme, so they might not give you a realistic view of what it's really like.
I mentioned why I responded in the very last paragraph: To reiterate my stance on the matter, as that was apparently needed.Lilani said:
Well, that would appear to be the problem, then ;-)
No, I'm not saying it's her own fault - I'm saying you cannot call "Rape".
You can call "morally dubious" if you're being generous, or call "Asshole jerkoff" if you're not, but you cannot call rape.
Of course.
Everyone has the right to be treated fairly in the eyes of the law.
When, however, a law is directly victimizing women, it is a problem.
It may be more of "teaching people not to be dicks and sue everyone" problem, but the only reason it is even viable to do that, is because women are already being victimized by the law. If the law was not how it is, it would not be viable to simply call "rape" and sue.You seem to have a very far outsiders perspective on things, which I can understand considering you live in Denmark. The big stories you hear on the news about women being "coerced" are big for a reason--they're easy. It's easy to peg the guy as the villain and the woman as the damsel in distress, and the media eats that sort of thing up. Plus it's sort of a gray area, which leaves plenty of room for people on the news/talk shows to debate and yell at each other.
I'm in college, and I know plenty of girls who have casual sex on an almost weekly basis. They get drunk and hook up with random guys. They rarely call "rape" because 1. they were drinking underage and 2. that is exactly why they went out and drank around a bunch of guys. The cases you are speaking of are a minority, highlighted by the media and made out to be the majority.
Sure there are plenty of BS sexual assault cases out there, but that's just sort of how America is right now. People look for any and every way to get someone in trouble and get millions in compensation out of them. It's sad, and as you've pointed out, it's especially easy for women to do. Just look at the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case from a few years ago.
I have noticed that I did misinterpret a couple of things you originally said because I wasn't interested in swallowing that block of text in one bite, but to me it's still not totally fair for you to target just the women in this. From personal observation down here, I think this is less of a "sexual liberation" problem than you seem to think. It's more of a "teaching people to not sue or criminally accuse over everything for money and headlines" problem.
Lastly, I am sorry that my post distraught you so much. It seems I didn't quite understand what you said, either. Hopefully we can wrap this up in a non-aggressive manner
I don't think that is where the problem lies, though. I give the women the benefit of the doubt, and say that if they call "rape", is it probably because they genuinely feel they were raped. Not because they want headlines or are money-grubbing harlots.
So for me the problem is the mindset(I am a victim), not the action(crying "rape").
I am traditionally a lurker, so I don't have much to add I just want to second this post. Typically when an OP that can be seen as "controversial", such as this one, is posted, intelligent discussion usually only lasts the first page or two before devolving into a flame war. Seeing this type of conversation in a forum gives me hope that we can eventually be able to discus these topics in "real life" without the facade of usernames and profile pictures.Vexik said:
Rape does happen, and there are many things that can fall into the rape/molestation line with or without sex actually happening but not all cases of men/women crying foul are true. I've heard a few times where a person calls something rape until a bit of digging turns up that they'd been fooling around with their 'rapist' for quite some time until finally being found out; maybe by their significant other or a family member. Adding drugs and alcohol to the mix turns it into a mess of "I didn't know! I couldn't stop it!" and nobody can say otherwise.
I will agree that women do need to start sticking up for themselves when men or other women start making passes at them. Keep saying no again and again, get loud about it, take it to the barkeeper/bouncer/whoever that they won't leave you alone. Bring a friend who stays sober to get in the way, or vouch for you later if it was consentual or not. It makes sense to me, but then again I don't exactly think the same way everyone else does.
I will agree that women do need to start sticking up for themselves when men or other women start making passes at them. Keep saying no again and again, get loud about it, take it to the barkeeper/bouncer/whoever that they won't leave you alone. Bring a friend who stays sober to get in the way, or vouch for you later if it was consentual or not. It makes sense to me, but then again I don't exactly think the same way everyone else does.
And why not? So what if she was too terrified to yell, or put into a state of shock from some previous experience? That doesn't mean it's not rape. Here is "rape" as defined by dictionary.coms0denone said:
rape
1    /reɪp/ Show Spelled [reyp] Show IPA noun, verb, raped, rap·ing.
?noun
1.
an act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
2.
the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
Nowhere in that definition does it say the victim must yell or scream for it to be rape. It's the fact that they were physically forced and it was unwanted. There isn't a 1-10 scale on how much they had to struggle for it to be a rape.
The laws are pretty clear. It's those who carry out the law and those who put forth their cases that are the problem.
But isn't that the basic mental process when you've been wronged? If someone steals your stuff, do you not tell the police "They stole my stuff"? If someone punches you in the face for no reason, do you not say "I was just standing there, and they punched me!"? Both of those statements are "victimizing"--making you out to be the person who was wronged. Whenever you are talking about one person wronging another, there will always be a "victim" and an "accused." Whether or not someone "feels" like a victim makes no difference--if they were wronged, they were wronged.
I think I've made my sentiments clear enough now (and used the word "wronged" enough to fill 50 police reports), so I'm done. If you want to respond and make one last remark that's fine, I'll still read it, but I'm done carrying on here. Take care.
Oh Christ, I thought that section I was answering was concerning coercion, not groping.Lilani said:
Holy crap I've said some stupid shit then. I apologise.
Groping is groping. There is no justification for it, and being riled up or not being riled up is entirely meaningless to discuss in that regard, as groping is groping.
Groping being "rape", though? What!? Unwanted sexual attention, sure, but "rape"? No.
My point about groping is already made in the OP. I think the only reason it is a problem in the U.S., is because of sexual repression. Sure, there will always be some jerks doing it, but those fall entirely outside the argument as they will be there regardless, regardless of the topic of discussion, too.
I thought we had this argument going strong, you know. You acknowledging that consent while intoxicated is still consent. You noting that America was hit with a serious case of "Suing everyone for anything, to get money and fame". I am rephrasing. I know.
Now you are telling me "they were wronged" as if that is agreed upon in my previous post. That is not agreed upon.
If someone is actually raped? They should call the police immediately, and try to not shower(washing away evidence), in order to make sure the sick bastard gets locked away from a long time.
If someone cries rape because they had sex with someone they regret? They need to grow up and realise that being intoxicated does not absolve one of ones responsibilities.
And it has everything to do with "feeling" like a victim. The law is only in place so that women can "feel" like victims. We do not have a similar law in Denmark and, similarly, women do not feel like victims.
Alright.
Too bad, I was beginning to enjoy our little discussion here - but what can you do?
Have a good evening/night/whatever.
Phew; this has been some heavy shit to get through (but very compelling at the same time).
Don't really have anything to add about the groping and coercion debate, it all seem pretty subjective to an individuals tolerance level (I personally like to call people who get a bit 'familiar' and see who gets embarrassed first).
The whole 'I was drunk so I didn't give consent' argument is missing one major point of logic though; if two people get 'intimate' while one party is drunk, the other person is under the influence as well. With this being almost always true then surely if a women (or man) cries rape in that circumstance then they are admitting to rape themselves.
Don't really have anything to add about the groping and coercion debate, it all seem pretty subjective to an individuals tolerance level (I personally like to call people who get a bit 'familiar' and see who gets embarrassed first).
The whole 'I was drunk so I didn't give consent' argument is missing one major point of logic though; if two people get 'intimate' while one party is drunk, the other person is under the influence as well. With this being almost always true then surely if a women (or man) cries rape in that circumstance then they are admitting to rape themselves.
Not necessarily.CatmanStu said:
Why?
Because "rape", by U.S. law, requires penile penetration.
The man could at most cry "sexual molestation".
You are entirely correct, however. I made the same point in one of my posts. "Are they raping each-other, if both are drunk?"
As a side note, a lot have supported that it is "non-consensual" while intoxicated, and that women are raped in this fashion... None have supported that men are equally *molested* like this. I know some have the opinion, but haven't voiced it (maybe not deemed relevant in the debate) - but I think it is of note.
This(above observation) appears to be another case of victimizing women, and judging the man to the perpertrator from the start. A notion which I think (call me on this, if it isn't true) is quite prevalent in the United States.
Since this is a very sensitive topic for a lot of people and hotly debated as I'm sure you've seen (admittedly the reason seems to be more misunderstanding than anything else) why don't we try looking at the real root of the problem?s0denone said:
Or at least make some propositions as to what the root(s) are?
Look at how most of the western world treats women. I say western world since I'm from the US and from what I understand Europe and similarly western oriented countries treat their women more or less the same (forgive the generalization, but this is the impression I've gotten and I've never been to Europe).
In the US, at least, we're taught that you're never supposed to hit women and whatnot. Not that I'm condoning it, but I've asked several times while growing up, "What if they hit me?" The answer is always a variation of, "You still don't hit them." This attitude clearly shows that our society thinks of women as unequal (or weaker if you prefer). I've been hit by many girls during school for nothing more than telling an off color joke (not at their expense) or saying something that they didn't like. Society dictates that even if they hit me first, since I'm a man, I shouldn't hit them back.
The whole attitude makes them readily jump to "Poor me, I'm a defenseless girl." I've seen it happen and I'm sure some of you have too. I'm not saying that all women do this, but I've seen my fair share of it and I'm sick of it.
In short, I'm sick of seeing women get off easy on stuff that if a guy had done it, they'd have gotten in much more trouble for.
On the other hand, there are women that want to be so "independent" that they give me dirty looks if I hold the door for them. I hold the door for anyone that happens to be going in or coming out of the door I'm going through, man or woman. I'm sick of hearing "I'm an independent woman." (something I hear from a friend of mine all the time, but she realies on people for rides and does almost everything her bf tells her to) If women want to be equal, which I think they should be, they need to accept equality on all levels. Same pay, same social norms and mores, same punishments, and everything else.
Women aren't any different than men other than the obvious physical and some psychological ones, and even those are varied and based on what is typical of the gender.
I know I'm probably going to get flamed for all that, so bring it on. XD
I didn't see this while I was posting or I'd have addressed it. Supposedly, if both parties are impaired by a substance, both are, in fact, victims of rape, which makes no sense to me, but that's how the law was explained to me during a college course I was taking. Admittedly it was during the "Don't drink" section of the class, so it may have just been a scare tactic of sorts. It was College Success in case anyone was wondering. XDs0denone said:
I don't understand why it's rape and not just a case of "Oh shit, I dun messed up." Unless one spiked the other's drink or coerced them to drink until very impaired, it doesn't seem like it'd be rape. Not to me anyway. Not that I'd encourage it.
Hang on, if that part about penile penetration is true (I honestly can't be bothered to check it out for myself) then that means a guy can rape a woman or another man, but a woman can't rape anyone? It is men who are being victimised for nothing more than owning a dick.s0denone said:
What next, guys having to get a dick license?
I can hear it already; "You should see my license, it says weapon of mass destruction"
OK stupid, Have you ever had someone holding you down choking the life out of you? Screaming they wished you were dead? In my case, my ex husband had all control of finances, and when I went to the law he walked right through the protective order! Hell the night he choked me I fought back he called the cops on me and I almost went to jail. So no I am not always keen on running to the cops. Until you have been there you cannot say what to doVryyk said:
I really wish that you hadn't experienced the hardship you suffered.AmayaOnnaOtaku said:
However, at the risk of sounding callous, it has nothing to do with the current discussion.
You can't apply your admittedly terrible sounding, domestic ordeal to the situation (drunken one night stands) that is being debated. You are using your emotion heavy ordeal to derail what has been a reasoned argument; please don't.
Again that is not the tone of the OP. The OP was painting of tone that rape victims are really asking for it. Maybe if the OP had made it more apparent then the response would not have been so harsh.kurupt87 said:
And Men can be raped by women and other men.
I really didn't get that impression from the OP at all.AmayaOnnaOtaku said:
As it is late and I'm tired I will quote reply you again tomorrow to explain what I got from the OP. The OP himself will no doubt chip in at some point to confirm, clarify or deny the words that I'll put in his mouth.
So, hopefully we can continue this tomorrow; good night.
If you go back through this entire thread, and replace each instance of s0denone citing or blaming US sexual repression with the phrase "because I've never seen Jersey Shore," it profoundly sheds new light on the entire discussion.
American feminists think they are better then men and all form of eroticizing or sexualizing of women is degrading (but the other way around is a-okay)if thrye want to help out their gender they should help out women in the middle east (I heard camels are better treated there then women)