Feminists invent ''sex consent kit''
Scroll to see replies
Original post by cacra
{Citation needed}
The truth is rape victims would rarely falsely report just logically speaking; reporting rape to an authority and going through with a trial are arduous and traumatic experiences I'm sure. As I've mentioned before, most victims don't report it according to estimates. Seeing as other people like yourself and others seem to make rape victims feel ashamed and guilty as well, it is even less likely they would falsely report the action.
False reports for rapes are not dissimilar to any other crime.
Original post by Paraphilos
Just because someone is drunk doesn't mean they want sex. Also, it is the perpetrators who should be exercising self control, not the victims.
I mean. I'm very much in agreement with you for much of what you are saying here ... it's just a pity it doesn't really seem to have that all that much to do with what the person you quoted was getting at.
What we're discussing is this shaky middle ground of: when is somebody "too drunk to consent" and the perhaps bigger question of when does criminal responsibility kick in when figuring out IF somebody is too drunk to consent.
There are huge issues with drunkenness in that it becomes very difficult to ascertain from somebodies behaviour what their mental state actually is, especially if everyone around them also has their judgement impaired from alcohol.
This isn't to say that there are NOT genuine rape victims who, because of excessive consumption of alcohol, have not been in a fit state to consent. But it is to say that when you add alcohol to the mix, this whole thing becomes so much more complicated and it makes, for actual victims, convictions that much harder to get.
So while it certainly isn't the victims fault that they were raped (ever), there are definite issues that arise from being drunk, especially when it comes to sexual assault, and it has to be said that drunkenness is generally not a good idea.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Paraphilos
False reports for rapes are not dissimilar to any other crime.
False reports for rapes are not dissimilar to any other crime.
Well then, it shouldn't be hard to find a source to back up your assertion.
Original post by Alba2013
It is stupid it has to come to this, having said that, if I was a guy I wouldn't leave the house without something like that, you just can't cover your ass enough.
Apart from the fact that it has no legal power whatsoever.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Paraphilos
The truth is rape victims would rarely falsely report just logically speaking; reporting rape to an authority and going through with a trial are arduous and traumatic experiences I'm sure. As I've mentioned before, most victims don't report it according to estimates. Seeing as other people like yourself and others seem to make rape victims feel ashamed and guilty as well, it is even less likely they would falsely report the action.
False reports for rapes are not dissimilar to any other crime.
False reports for rapes are not dissimilar to any other crime.
The truth is that NO rape victims would falsely report by virtue of them being rape victims. The problem is people who haven't been raped falsely reporting ... VERY logically speaking.
Good this will teach women not to rape.
Original post by cacra
Well then, it shouldn't be hard to find a source to back up your assertion.
You know there is plenty of evidence out there to provide you with an insight to the truth; the greatest of these I have on my hard drive is written by David Lisak of the University of Massachusetts Psychology dept who embarked upon a 10 year analysis of rape allegations.
He and his colleagues found that roughly 2-10% of allegations are said to be false overall but, taking the most recent study of a north eastern university, out of 136 cases studied only 8 were deemed to be false (that's 5.9%).
By some contrast to that study, on home shores in the UK, between Jan 2011 and May 2012 there were 5651 prosecutions for rape of which 35 (that's 0.6%) were falsely accused.
There are other studies that do not exceed the 10% threshold regarding the former point I made. All that this information I've given you says is that to trust the alleged rapist is not just morally questionable but also statistically and logically incorrect.
Original post by Paraphilos
You know there is plenty of evidence out there to provide you with an insight to the truth; the greatest of these I have on my hard drive is written by David Lisak of the University of Massachusetts Psychology dept who embarked upon a 10 year analysis of rape allegations.
He and his colleagues found that roughly 2-10% of allegations are said to be false overall but, taking the most recent study of a north eastern university, out of 136 cases studied only 8 were deemed to be false (that's 5.9%).
By some contrast to that study, on home shores in the UK, between Jan 2011 and May 2012 there were 5651 prosecutions for rape of which 35 (that's 0.6%) were falsely accused.
There are other studies that do not exceed the 10% threshold regarding the former point I made. All that this information I've given you says is that to trust the alleged rapist is not just morally questionable but also statistically and logically incorrect.
He and his colleagues found that roughly 2-10% of allegations are said to be false overall but, taking the most recent study of a north eastern university, out of 136 cases studied only 8 were deemed to be false (that's 5.9%).
By some contrast to that study, on home shores in the UK, between Jan 2011 and May 2012 there were 5651 prosecutions for rape of which 35 (that's 0.6%) were falsely accused.
There are other studies that do not exceed the 10% threshold regarding the former point I made. All that this information I've given you says is that to trust the alleged rapist is not just morally questionable but also statistically and logically incorrect.
You're wrong, unsurprisingly. 35 people were prosecuted for misreporting rape, the number who misreported rape (and didn't get prosecuted) is far, far higher.
Original post by Paraphilos
You know there is plenty of evidence out there to provide you with an insight to the truth; the greatest of these I have on my hard drive is written by David Lisak of the University of Massachusetts Psychology dept who embarked upon a 10 year analysis of rape allegations.
He and his colleagues found that roughly 2-10% of allegations are said to be false overall but, taking the most recent study of a north eastern university, out of 136 cases studied only 8 were deemed to be false (that's 5.9%).
By some contrast to that study, on home shores in the UK, between Jan 2011 and May 2012 there were 5651 prosecutions for rape of which 35 (that's 0.6%) were falsely accused.
There are other studies that do not exceed the 10% threshold regarding the former point I made. All that this information I've given you says is that to trust the alleged rapist is not just morally questionable but also statistically and logically incorrect.
He and his colleagues found that roughly 2-10% of allegations are said to be false overall but, taking the most recent study of a north eastern university, out of 136 cases studied only 8 were deemed to be false (that's 5.9%).
By some contrast to that study, on home shores in the UK, between Jan 2011 and May 2012 there were 5651 prosecutions for rape of which 35 (that's 0.6%) were falsely accused.
There are other studies that do not exceed the 10% threshold regarding the former point I made. All that this information I've given you says is that to trust the alleged rapist is not just morally questionable but also statistically and logically incorrect.
I'm genuinely curious, what was the criteria for determining whether an accusation was false. Presumably it was positive verification and not simply assuming not guilty verdicts, or cases where charges were dropped to be de facto false accusations.
Original post by limetang
The truth is that NO rape victims would falsely report by virtue of them being rape victims. The problem is people who haven't been raped falsely reporting ... VERY logically speaking.
Utter nonsense and a scapegoat for genuine rape victims. First, the process of reporting for rape is not worth it if that is your motive. Second, as I've stated many many times on this thread prosecuting someone for rape is insanely difficult.
Why are you nitpicking at things like this? Please look at the grand scheme of things and show some sympathy for the people who have terminally traumatised by their experiences.
Original post by cacra
You're wrong, unsurprisingly. 35 people were prosecuted for misreporting rape, the number who misreported rape (and didn't get prosecuted) is far, far higher.
You've misread my statement; that part is referring to alleged rapists, not reporters.
In any case, I'm not sure you're willing to change your point of view in spite of evidence - why is this?
Original post by Viva Emptiness
What if I change my mind half way through and he doesn't stop 
Then it'd be rape - consent is a continuing thing and can be withdrawn at any point.
I'm not saying this is a great idea, but it says that 'we'll start to have consensual sex', not that it will end that way.
don't see the point. not having one signed is not evidence you raped. Signing one is evidence you DID NOT rape her.
Although i guess its proof you did sleep with her.
if i was about to shag a woman and she pulled that out at me, I'd tear it up and say "say no" and carry on kissing her.
Although i guess its proof you did sleep with her.
if i was about to shag a woman and she pulled that out at me, I'd tear it up and say "say no" and carry on kissing her.
Original post by Paraphilos
You've misread my statement; that part is referring to alleged rapists, not reporters.
In any case, I'm not sure you're willing to change your point of view in spite of evidence - why is this?
In any case, I'm not sure you're willing to change your point of view in spite of evidence - why is this?
Feminists guide to arguments:
1).Post flawed sources that have almost no relation to the debate at hand.
2).Ask why the opposing side who asks for better sources isn't willing to change their view despite the flawed sources being posted.
3).Win
I've been down this road too many times.
Original post by Paraphilos
Utter nonsense and a scapegoat for genuine rape victims. First, the process of reporting for rape is not worth it if that is your motive. Second, as I've stated many many times on this thread prosecuting someone for rape is insanely difficult.
Why are you nitpicking at things like this? Please look at the grand scheme of things and show some sympathy for the people who have terminally traumatised by their experiences.
Why are you nitpicking at things like this? Please look at the grand scheme of things and show some sympathy for the people who have terminally traumatised by their experiences.
It's not nonesense though. The only people who can falsely report a crime of rape are those who have not been victims of a crime of rape. The process of reporting a rape I'd imagine is far less arduous if you're not actually a victim of it. The difficulty in the process as far as I can see comes about as a result of genuine victims being forced to retell the story, being cross-examined in court, being asked detailed and probing questions while throughout it being the victim in all of it.
It's important to say because it's important to actually get a real idea of what the mindset of a false reporter is, it's miles away from somebody who has been raped, and you have got to admit that the process of reporting and prosecuting an alleged rape is a lot easier for somebody who hasn't been raped.
I have immense sympathy for people who have been genuinely and horrifically hurt.
One thing does stand out though. Why is it that we will readily accept that a worrying percentage of men are bad enough to rape, but unwilling to accept the idea that any meaningful number of women could ever possible be bad enough people to falsely report one? Men are not horrible monsters and women are not perfect angels.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by limetang
It's not nonesense though. The only people who can falsely report a crime of rape are those who have not been victims of a crime of rape. The process of reporting a rape I'd imagine is far less arduous if you're not actually a victim of it. The difficulty in the process as far as I can see comes about as a result of genuine victims being forced to retell the story, being cross-examined in court, being asked detailed and probing questions while throughout it being the victim in all of it.
I have immense sympathy for people who have been genuinely and horrifically hurt.
One thing does stand out though. Why is it that we will readily accept that a worrying percentage of men are bad enough to rape, but unwilling to accept the idea that any meaningful number of women could ever possible be bad enough people to falsely report one? Men are not horrible monsters and women are not perfect angels.
I have immense sympathy for people who have been genuinely and horrifically hurt.
One thing does stand out though. Why is it that we will readily accept that a worrying percentage of men are bad enough to rape, but unwilling to accept the idea that any meaningful number of women could ever possible be bad enough people to falsely report one? Men are not horrible monsters and women are not perfect angels.
I'm glad you think rationally but, specifically on your last point, most people in fact do not trust women at all. That's the issue. We do not in general accept in any stretch of the imagination that any men are bad enough to do it.
I can see you do but most people don't unfortunately.
Original post by APlantinga
don't see the point. not having one signed is not evidence you raped. Signing one is evidence you DID NOT rape her.
Although i guess its proof you did sleep with her.
if i was about to shag a woman and she pulled that out at me, I'd tear it up and say "say no" and carry on kissing her.
Although i guess its proof you did sleep with her.
if i was about to shag a woman and she pulled that out at me, I'd tear it up and say "say no" and carry on kissing her.
Not even that, you could very easily rape your partner even with that signed. Which would bring up the more worrying thing of these contracts being used as a successful defence against actual rapes.
Original post by limetang
Not even that, you could very easily rape your partner even with that signed. Which would bring up the more worrying thing of these contracts being used as a successful defence against actual rapes.
If I were a serial rapist I would make them sign the damn paper and get away with it.
Original post by Paraphilos
I'm glad you think rationally but, specifically on your last point, most people in fact do not trust women at all. That's the issue. We do not in general accept in any stretch of the imagination that any men are bad enough to do it.
"Most" people, really?
I can't tell the difference between 'real' feminists and satire anymore...
Original post by Paraphilos
I'm glad you think rationally but, specifically on your last point, most people in fact do not trust women at all. That's the issue. We do not in general accept in any stretch of the imagination that any men are bad enough to do it.
I can see you do but most people don't unfortunately.
I can see you do but most people don't unfortunately.
Do you honestly believe that? Look up the name "Emma Sulkowicz". She lied about being raped, got found out lying by a liberal college court that is heavily in favour of the woman - and yet all she had to do was carry a mattress around and post of social media that she was raped and 100,000's of people unquestioningly believed her. She went on a campaign harrasing the guy she accused and basically ruined his life, and the college did nothing to stop it. She got her story in the New York times and Rolling Stone. Despite the fact, she had been proven to be lying.
And you say people don't believe women?
Feminists live in some kind of fantasy.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
