Thursday, January 04, 2007

. . . And Yes Must Mean YES

One thing that always bugged me reading conservative male-authored blogs [<-- cheap shot opening there! Go on, take it!] were the sidebars filled with cheesecake ads. But I'll forgive Auguste's breasty photo of Mariska Hargitay because (1) come on, it's Mariska Hargitay and (2) man has it going on:

Consent is defined according to the quality and quantity of assent, not the quality and quantity of dissent.

Almost every argument about rape can be boiled down to this one sentence, because almost every argument about rape centers on what the victim did or didn’t do. “She didn’t kick him, she didn’t bite him, she didn’t dress modestly, she didn’t scream for help, she didn’t break his nose…” Rape apologists throw up requirements, levels and types of dissent that the woman would have had to live up to in order to really have been raped. It’s interesting, however, that they’re always able to come up with something.

Er, safewords?

But exactly. Read it all. You too, Mariska.

22 comments:

Auguste said...

In my defense, a) I considered cutting off the "breastiness" aspect of that picture, but I figured that was just overdoing it and b) I have certain clearances and approvals for said blog-obsession, the nature of which I'm not at liberty to divulge.

Plus, like you said. Mariska.

ilyka said...

Also, it isn't an ad. You're not selling Mariska, you're endorsing her. Very different thing.

cond0010 said...

Hmmmm... not to dive into a prickly issue but... okay! here goes...this whole consent issue should be completely blown out of the water if the guy has the restraint to allow the woman to be on top for the first ummm... evening.

Just a thought...

gennimcmahon said...

In a local issue splashed about in today's rag (local newspaper), I noted this headline: "Alleged Rape Victim Testifies". As I am unable to link to things, Feministe posted (from another blog, Lord, my head explodes) a satirical transcript subjecting a male mugging victim to the sort of questions asked of a rape victim to demonstrate the difference in how we treat victims. Alas, this principle is demonstrated by the headline mentioned first, in that the young woman in question was a high school student who was raped by her coach. If she had been mugged, the headline might have read, "Mugging Victim Testifies Against Accused." Note that the status of victim is no longer "alleged;" it exists. Why is it alleged rape when the law clearly states that a child cannot give consent to an adult? Because she didn't fight the relationship. We've completely missed the boat as far as the fact that the law was enacted entirely because of situations where children are exploited by predators. Other recent cases in our own local school system included a substitute teacher, male, who raped a special ed student. His excuse was that she came on to him. The mind boggles, staggers to the sidewalk, and has to sit down.

And, cond0010, I've no clue what on earth you're talking about.

cond0010 said...

gennimcmahon , I believe that rape is a horrible thing to happen to a woman. I think that it happens plenty of times in real life and guys who do those things should be punished severely.

OTOH, women may also not tell the truth about the night before and get the man in a load of trouble for whatever reason: be it their honor is damaged, they got caught by a friend and she is embarrassed, she is angry that it was only a one night stand, etc...

A good example is recently about how one woman has accused 5 young men from a sports team of raped and they found out that she was... lying.

So, really, lets be a little objective here and not put all the burden upon the man.

My suggestion is a valid one. In the court of law it would hold up very well in the defense of a man wrongly accused.

Furthermore, if the woman doesn't want to do 'it', then it is far more difficult for 'it' to happen.

If you still feel that I don't know what I am talking about, then say so: but state your _reasoning_ also instead of a dismissve statement that has no basis in fact.

Nothing is more boring than a one-sided Male Bashing tirade from a woman who has issues with Men.

gennimcmahon said...

Objective? A sexual position, you posit, would change the nature of rape accusations? Is it that, in your world, a woman can't be raped from below?

I think every crime statistic out there disproves you, particularly when such a small percentage of reported rapes result in convictions, when nearly every woman can recount an experience in which she was sexually assaulted in some way, and I think it's 1 in 3 were legally raped. I'm not too worried about "male bashing" because that's not what I'm doing, I'm "rapist bashing" and that's quite the comfortable position advocate.

It's always OTOH, isn't it, with you rape apologists? The press finds a woman who lied, one standing in the midst of hundreds and thousands who didn't, and you say, "See? See? All us mens, we're in DANGER here!" And, seriously, if your sexual style suggests that indeed, you might act in a way that would give a woman reason to "lie" there's a pretty simple solution. Keep it zipped up. Preferably permanently.

belledame222 said...

wow, that's depressingly boilerplate, condonumeralwhatever.

sexist assumptions about what a male-female encounter is supposed to be ("if the guy has the restraint to allow the woman to be on top?" say WHA?): check.

"women lie all the time, and mens' reputations are equivalent to justice for an actual rape victim:" check.

"I am Man, therefore Rational and Objective, unlike you emotional type womenfolk, indulgent chuckle:" check.

Furthermore, if the woman doesn't want to do 'it', then it is far more difficult for 'it' to happen.: check!

"Youse just have Issues with Men, is what:" speaking of boring. in sum: people here have heard this eight billion times or more, you tedious little nose goblin, so you can take your helpful suggestions, chew them vigorously to a fine pulp, rub them all over your body and wallow in them 'til you're fungal.

p.s. "thinking you, personally, are an asshat"=! a slur on your entire gender, convenient as that would be for you.

ilyka said...

gennimcmahon , I believe that rape is a horrible thing to happen to a woman. I think that it happens plenty of times in real life and guys who do those things should be punished severely.

cond0010, I believe that robbery is a horrible thing to happen to anyone. I think that it happens plenty of times in real life and people who those things should be punished severely.

This, by the way, is the post Genni was talking about. You will note a great deal of similarity between it and what I wrote above. Read it, and be absolutely certain you understand it, before you continue posting here.

OTOH, women may also not tell the truth about the night before and get the man in a load of trouble for whatever reason: be it their honor is damaged

All the more reason to tear down the idea that sexual "purity" is equivalent to "honor" for women. Tell me, does that go both ways? Should I seek out the most virginal man I can find and coo over his loads of honor?

they got caught by a friend and she is embarrassed

Okay, seriously? How psychopathic do you have to believe women are as a sex if you really think this scenario is common enough to warrant mention? That a woman would commit perjury and follow through with it all from personal embarrassment? Which, hey, we're back to my first point above: Quit shaming women for having sex, and this problem goes buh-bye.

People have on occasion faked their deaths, too. Therefore, suicide is a vastly overrated problem.

she is angry that it was only a one night stand, etc...

I've been in that situation, as have all my friends. "Let's prosecute him for rape" never occurred to any of us. Again: How psychopathic do you have to believe women are to float this? Furthermore, you clearly have no clue what goes on in a rape investigation. Hint: It's nothing you'd sign up for just for revenge kicks.

A good example is recently about how one woman has accused 5 young men from a sports team of raped and they found out that she was... lying.

Yes, and just like Tawana Brawley, we're all going to have that one thrown in our faces in every discussion that touches in any way upon rape ever EVER.

How many ". . . and she was LYING!" cases has that been in the last 10 years, anyhow? Do you really think it's statistically significant?

So, really, lets be a little objective here and not put all the burden upon the man.

If we were being objective here, we'd note that the burden for the commission of a crime rests on the criminal, who in the case of rape is nearly always a man.

But we're not being objective here. We're fishing for excuses to shore up our sense of entitlement to the pussy.

Furthermore, if the woman doesn't want to do 'it', then it is far more difficult for 'it' to happen.

This tells me you either didn't read Auguste's post, or my excerpt from it; or you've already forgotten it; or you're deliberately ignoring it. Which is it? To review:

Consent is defined according to the quality and quantity of assent, not the quality and quantity of dissent.

Question: If that's a male-bashing observation, why is it so easy for Auguste to make, and why do I applaud him for so doing?

You know what's male-bashing?--Assuming we must grant men the greatest leeway possible (again, more than we do for any other crime) in cases of rape because, gosh darn it, the poor things can't help themselves. They see all that womanhood and they just go freakin' nuts!

Finally, "if the woman doesn't want it, it is far more difficult" is also known as the "thread a moving needle" bogus defense, nicely raised and debunked here and here. It's been around for centuries. The frequency of rape has decreased accordingly in that time. Oh! I meant the frequency of rape has increased during that time.

It's a favorite of mine, too, because it leads inescapably to the erroneous conclusion that a man cannot rape an intoxicated woman. "Well, she didn't struggle or fight!" No indeed! It's mighty difficult to do so on Rohypnol or tequila shots.

Nothing is more boring than a one-sided Male Bashing tirade from a woman who has issues with Men.

I love how "male" and "men" are capitalized here, but not women, and don't even start me on the beauty of armchair psychoanalysis from across the mighty internet. From, I am sure, a veritable expert. Anyway, congratulations: You've just outed yourself as one of those pitiable mens' rights activists, and I'm telling you right now, fair warning: You will either bring that sneering tone of yours waaaaaaaayyy down, or this will be your final comment here. I did not start a blog to bask in gratuitous snide remarks from strangers, nor did I open up comments to provide a safe haven for rape apologists.

cond0010 said...

(*sigh*)

(*A sexual position, you posit, would change the nature of rape accusations? *)

Yes it would. If the woman was on top, not only would his 'little precious' be between her legs, but it would be far closer to her hands and arms than it would be his.

Also, it only takes six pounds of pressure on his 'little precious' to do some serious damage to it. In a position such as stated above, it wouldn't take much to 'shift him into overdrive' and make him wish never to meet with her again.

Lastly, he will be on his back and will have no traction with his feet or legs. 3/4 of your body strength comes from your legs.

So (unless he has a weapon or is FAR stronger than she is) by her being on top she truly is in the 'drivers seat' and can decide if she wants to go for a ride or not.

If she does NOT want to consent, all she has to do is not only say 'no' but actually GET OFF HIM. Actions, such as that cannot be confused.

(*I think every crime statistic out there disproves you, *)

Every crime statistic? Total Bullshit. Obviously.

(*... when nearly every woman can recount an experience in which she was sexually assaulted in some way...)

I disagree with that statement. Nearly every woman? Check your sources...

(*and I think it's 1 in 3 were legally raped.*)

That is a very sad statistic. Though I question such a high ratio of women that have been raped in the United States (300 million people, 150 million women, which means 50 _million_ women being raped? - that is a bit high number of rapes...), I think it is absolutely awful that women get raped (non consentual sex).

(*I'm not too worried about "male bashing" because that's not what I'm doing, I'm "rapist bashing" and that's quite the comfortable position advocate.

I'm rapist bashing too. All I am saying is that misunderstandings are significantly reduced if the woman get to decide whether to have sex - not only with words - but with action: all she has to do is get off and the guy will know (through her _actions_) that she is not interested at that time.

The Date Rape issue is a serious one that alot of guys have talked about...

(*It's always OTOH, isn't it, with you rape apologists? *)

Beep! Penalty.

Factual Error coupled with an Inductive Fallacy.

I never defended the rapists. That is an error on your part. It became an Inductuctive Fallacy and Ad hominem when you called me a rapist apologist which I deeply resent.

(*The press finds a woman who lied, one standing in the midst of hundreds and thousands who didn't, and you say, "See? See? All us mens, we're in DANGER here!" *)

Settle down. Your exagerating my defense to the point of ridiculousness. There ARE nice guys who are falsely accused (for whatever reason) and all I did was state an obvious solution for them to ensure that there is no confusion in the heat of the moment.

Your attacks on my very innocent solution have been somewhat on the shrill side suggesting that you have issues that you need to deal with in regards to dating and men.

(*Keep it zipped up. Preferably permanently.*)

Miss, with an attitude like yours, you shouldn't worry about the likes of me. I prefer a VERY LONG friendship before I ever start dating and frankly, our short duration friendship ended a couple hours ago.

Besides, after 20 years of 'dating' I know, from experience that sex before marriage really damages the relationship.

One more thing before I stop commenting:

All I have heard from you is various garbage arguments about the evils that rapists (a certain percentage of men in a certain percentage of the world in a certain percentage of a country - but men neverthless)do.

I would like to hear 5 sentences from you about things you _like_ about men in general. No sarcasm. No off color humor.

Prove to me you do not hate men.

cond0010 said...

Ilyka, belladame222,

Thank you for your responses.

ilyka said...

Prove to me you do not hate men.

Uh, Reason Guy? The difficulties of proving a negative are well-established (while not necessarily always impossible, it is often impractical to attempt; see the "green swans" example in that link particularly).

Furthermore, the burden of proof rests with the accuser.

It's funny how you're very very cognizant of that with regards to rape, but happy to ignore it elsewhere, when it suits you.

cond0010 said...

You don't have the faintest idea what I said Ilyka.

I have been horribly and wrongly maligned at this website and I will never come here again.

I hope you post my comments proudly to show everyone - especially the men - what kind of people you & belledame222 really are.


... and me for that matter...

ilyka said...

I refuted you point-by-point; further, I--oh, let's just quote you, shall we?

If you still feel that I don't know what I am talking about, then say so: but state your _reasoning_ also instead of a dismissve statement that has no basis in fact.

And this is what I get for all my reasoning? You're responding with dismissiveness?

You don't have the faintest idea what I said Ilyka.

I guess that's why I quoted it so extensively! To remind myself of what I had no idea about! Myself, and everyone else!

Weeeeeeeaaak.

I have been horribly and wrongly maligned at this website and I will never come here again.

It's maligning you to refute you point-by-point, with reason. Okay.

I hope you post my comments proudly to show everyone - especially the men - what kind of people you & belledame222 really are.

Won't speak for belledame, but me, I'm the sort who expects that if you swan in here demanding reason you'll fucking sack up and bring some yourself. Participate, you know, on the very terms you set for all the rest of us? But I agree: Crazy!

I am not worried what the mens will think of me, you know. I have regular commenters here who are men, but see, that's the thing:

They're MEN. Not babies.

Auguste said...

"Sack up?" Oppressor!

ilyka said...

Hey! I could have said "Sack up, HO," a la the Go Fug Yourself bloggers.

In fact, now I'm kind of sorry I didn't.

JackGoff said...

You don't have the faintest idea what I said Ilyka.

I don't think any of us do. We go for coherence.

I have been horribly and wrongly maligned at this website and I will never come here again.

"I said 'GOOD DAY, SIR!'"

ilyka said...

"I said 'GOOD DAY, SIR!'"

I know, right? "I am leaving now! See this? This is me leaving! Right now! Why aren't you crying? You should be sad! Because I am LEAVING!"

Eh, there'll be more where he came from. There always are.

JackGoff said...

Besides, after 20 years of 'dating' I know, from experience that sex before marriage really damages the relationship.

I know, from experience, that you cannot make one lick of sense.

Pun intended, dammit.

belledame222 said...

I have been horribly and wrongly maligned at this website and I will never come here again.

I hope you post my comments proudly to show everyone - especially the men - what kind of people you & belledame222 really are.


"...and you know what you are, you are just BASTARD PEOPLE, and I'm just gonna go home and bite my pillow, is what I'm gonna do!"

ilyka said...

"And I'm NOT wearing my retainer to school tomorrow! So there!"

Yeah, I may be enjoying this a little too much.

Then again, I don't get 'em this sulky every day of the week, either. You have to enjoy the feast in order to weather the famine, I figure.

Sniper said...

Nothing is more boring than a one-sided Male Bashing tirade from a woman who has issues with Men.


Ooh! Ooh! I can name one thing to start with: a rape apologist using the same tired arguments about women who lie about rape that were hackneyed 40 years ago.

Chris said...

Nothing is more boring than a one-sided Male Bashing tirade from a woman who has issues with Men.

I am unaware of any of these women having issues with me, and I suspect I would find out in rather short order if they did.

My guess is that it's your rape-excusing fuckwaddery rather than your gender.