NEWS: In Any Color, Rape is Rape

Jesus fucking Christ, this is ridiculous.

"NO" (at whatever fucking volume) followed by SEX equals RAPE. How fucking clear cut do they want it?

Rarely is it ever that clear cut.

waaaaaait a minute. so when presented with a pretty clear-cut argument that could be made, Bitch took it the extra mile, fucked it up, and ended up creating a gong show flamewar instead of a discussion of the obvious point of the article?

well i never.

At the end of the article, it made clear the power that comes from saying to oneself, first off, that one has been a victim.

My reading of this, in total, is that the discussion of "gray rape" is not avout doubting whether a rape occurred, but the victim's state of mind -- that it's easy, whether we like this or not, for a rape victim in Casual Hook Up Land to internalise feelings of "I shouldn't have been there" or "I brought it on myself".

I really fail to see any claim in that piece that rapes did not happen in those particular cases.

Didn't really read what's been written, did we?

Victim blamer.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Sorry.

I agree with you.

Once, when I was still in the Feminist Group here, I made the statement that I thought it was important in discussing rape and sexual assault that feminists distinguish the issues of:
- women taking responsibility for self-protection and self-awareness (because they can't assume anyone else will), and
- men taking responsibility for not raping women.

I thought at the time that someone would jump up and down and get angry at me and accuse me of blaming-the-victim, but nobody did. I thought, wow, things really have moved on. The nature of the discussion really seems to be changing.

Then I read threads like this and think, noooo, same old same old.

what if....

first date scenario

----------------------------------------------
the girl says "I don't want to have sex tonight," early on.
Then says "lets have sex," later when she is drunk.

the guy, drunk as well, is all for having sex and lets her make the progressions.
she even grabs his dick and sticks it in her vagina.

next morning she wakes up next to him and doesn't remember anything.
and decides she wouldn't have slept with him if it wasn't for the alcohol.

Could this be considered rape?
(only alcohol was ingested and both parties drank of their own accord.)
-----------------------------------------------

I feel like it's an obvious "Duh! Of course not."

I just wanted to read different opinions.


p.s. I am aware that there may be spelling/grammatical errors

In previous threads, I've tried to point out the fact that the delivery is every bit as important as the message itself. The spin, in combination with the tone of the articles tend to overpower the actual points worth discussing.

Unfortunately, many people tend to be overly self-righteous and refuse to utilize any sort of constructive criticism.

I wouldn't consider it rape. People change their minds.

Just like someone may think they want sex and agree to it but then change their mind right before actually engaging in it. It's still their right to change their decision either way.

On the alcohol issue, I don't think that anyone can ever use that as an excuse for any behavior. Everyone is responsible for their one alcohol consumption.

Of course, having something slipped into a drink is an entirely different story.

You live in the United States. You're expected for have poor spelling and grammar skills. It's what makes us 'Mericans.

That's not what the article does. The article uses at least three examples of clear-cut acquaintance rape and then minimizes them by claiming they're really this new thing those college hook-up kids call "gray rape" because it somehow actually invovled

The first three examples in the article are not "more confusing than date rape", and the issues of consent are clear as fucking crystal. In both cases the woman said no, and the men raped them. Period.

Claiming that those rapes fell anywhere between consent and denial is bullshit. Claiming that both parties were unsure about who wanted what is bullshit.

It's also annoying now that the concept of "date rape" is considered to actually be rape (Katie Roiphe notwithstanding), that anyone feels compelled to invent or popularize a new bullshit phrase to try and make women feel uncertain or guilty about what "real rape" actually is.

Plus there's the whole "You shouldn't blame yourself, except you have to admit if you weren't a drunken slut who goes home with men you wouldn't get gray raped" tone to the second half of the article, but hey, I guess I'm stuck in the 90's or something.

a) I have no idea who's pioneered or continued to use the "gray rape" term. Is it college kids?

b) The first person in the article, Alicia, says herself of her own experience that "It fell into a gray area" before the writer ever uses the term "gray rape."

I'm not disputing with you or with Morgan that in fact the case is clear, and it's rape. No argument from me.

I'm explaining why my first reaction to this article was not outrage, but an impression that this was discussing the states of mind of people who would say of an experience where they'd been raped, "It was kind of a gray area, and I wasn't sure whether I'd been raped."

Put it another way: imagine a women's studies class about rape and sexual assault, that used this article as a device to engender classroom discussion. Imagine it's used to stimulate discussion on everything from self-protection strategies, on the importance and the power of saying no, and on the importance of being able to acknowledge that rape has in fact occurred when that "no" has been ignored. Not to mention on the teaching of young men to understand what is and is not appropriate behaviour, let alone what's legally permissible.

The alternative scenario would be to run a class with this as a discussion piece, which would be used to make the point that the media is sexist and this writer is a victim-blaming fool.

I, personally, can see this article being used in the first scenario, but it seems like for some people the only appropriate use of it would be in the second.

DevilsReject gets it.

Which is more important to you, guys? Getting laid, or not being a rapist? If there's any doubt--if a girl says no and then later says yes and you feel like she's being "coy" and you're NOT SURE WHAT SHE WANTS, then yeah: you say no.

That's what responsible adults do.

Honey, I'm powerful--but I'm not that powerful. I can't *make* anyone feel anything. If the boys feel defensive and alienated, that's their problem--not mine.

So, 'being the gentleman' means making a decision for a female - that is, listening to what she is asking for and then saying 'BUT, she is a girl who does not know what is good for her'?

+1

It's interesting how we've got a lot of comments saying "there's nothing wrong with telling women how to avoid rape" and at the same time a lot of comments arguing that telling menhow to avoid rape--don't have sex with someone if they're sending mixed signals, duh--is "bullshit."

Making a decision not to have sex with someone in a situation that makes you feel uncomfortable is not making a decision "for" them. It's making a decision for yourself. Women's agency does not erase men's. Both people have to agree to have sex; if one person isn't sure for whatever reason--whether that reason is they don't want to, or they think their partner doesn't want to--then they oughta say no.

It's not that damn hard.

Good point! In the case of the scenario we're discussing, however, it seems less like mixed signals rather than a genuine change of mind. I completely agree that the other person (independent of anyone's gender, by the way) should make extra sure in such a situation that there is indeed clear, informed consent, or whatever the magic phrase may be ("You're sure?", "You're not going to regret it later?", etc.). But I don't see any responsibility to still say no if that's the case.

Well, it's hard to tell; but I don't see what's to be scared of if you're sure someone has changed their mind, no? But the "mind if I play with you a little bit" sounds kind of one-sided, and you know, if you're *scared*, then you should say no.

Of course people can change their minds. It happens all the time. But if you are not certain that that's what's happened--and that the mind-change is uncoerced, whether by drink, momentary excitement, or anything else--then yes: it is your responsibility to say no. Not for her, but for yourself: because you are "scared" and not sure.

"Let's do it" is mixed signals?

Sure. One person could be confused as to whether the other is up for sex....or about to shoot a new tandem actor Nike commercial.

or maybe even "Let's do this", which could simply be a nerdy girl quoting Leeroy Jenkins.

I'd agree with you on that as well.

if the girl doesn't consider it rape, it's not rape.

You're talking about considerate behaviour.

Being a gentleman.

Being thoughtful.

Being ethical.

All of which are worthwhile things to talk about.

You're not talking about rape here. Rape is not part of the scenario you're discussing.