The way women are trying to shame Ched Evans is despicable (and sexist)

I'm not going to say much on this other than I can't help but feel this is the sort of thing where women/feminists jump onto and actually are being sexist. It's one of these things where they want to believe what they want to. In the same way a girl said to me last week at work that a physical job was for men (when she couldn't be bothered) - to which I said and a woman's job is to be in the kitchen right? You get my point.

Anyways this girl who claims to be raped by Ched Evans DOES NOT EVEN REMEMBER THE DAM INCIDENT. For crying out loud how can a drunken girl who cannot remember a single thing just claim rape. She can't know. Women can be very deceiving. Maybe she had a guilty conscience. We don't know the truth. Noone does but that doesn't make Ched Evans guilty.

I feel like women are just supporting this girl because she'a girl, not because she's innocent. Therefore in my mind it is clear to me that they are outwardly projecting sexist views.

Thoughts?

If you have sex with someone who is not in the mental state to consent, that is rape. You are taking advantage of someone who is not in control of their actions. You can argue whether or not it's right for that person to have put themselves in that position in the first place but whether or not you agree with that, this was undeniably a case of rape and there is nothing in the slightest bit unfair about his conviction. What you essentially seem to be arguing is that drunken people are fair game for assault, which is just disgusting. If that wasn't bad enough, the victim's identity was leaked and she received further abuse over the internet, forcing her to get a new identity. Her new identity was also leaked and she got even more abuse, forcing her to change her identity again. Her life has been completely ruined because of this footballer. You can make a case that she should not have got that drunk in the first place but Evans is overwhelmingly at fault here and it is not her fault in the slightest that he took advantage of her. That is his fault and his fault alone.

The worst part out of all of this is that Evans shows no remorse. If he showed that he understood what he did was wrong, I'd have some sympathy. But not only has he not done this, he hasn't spoken out at all about the further abuse the victim received because of the disgusting behaviour of his fans. He clearly hasn't been rehabilitated in the slightest and doesn't seem to have learned anything from his conviction.

There is nothing remotely sexist about this. She should not have got so drunk in the first place but that does not make her fair game for abuse. He raped her - that is totally undeniable as far as the law is concerned - and she is not responsible for that. He has showed no remorse for this and has not spoken out about the abuse his victim received at the hands of his fans. Evans does not deserve to be a free man as far as I'm concerned and he certainly does not deserve to be playing for a football team where he will be seen as a rolemodel for many children.

I didn't read after you first sentence. A man and woman, two equals get drunk and consent to sex (just like the hundreds of drunken sexual encounters between strangers every friday/saturday night) - now according to your first sentence, word for word, you are implying that hundreds of women are raped every Friday/saturday evening.

It depends to what extent you get drunk. If you're a little tipsy, you're obviously still in control of your actions. If you're completely wasted to the point where you barely have any control over your body - which is the situation we're talking about - then the person in question isn't much more in control of themselves than someone who is unconscious. They are not in the position to consent. Therefore, you have having non-consentual sex which is, by definition, rape. If you had no control of your body, I don't think you'd appreciate strangers assaulting you either.

If you have sex with someone who is not in the mental state to consent, that is rape.

The worst part out of all of this is that Evans shows no remorse. If he showed that he understood what he did was wrong, I'd have some sympathy. But not only has he not done this, he hasn't spoken out at all about the further abuse the victim received because of the disgusting behaviour of his fans. He clearly hasn't been rehabilitated in the slightest and doesn't seem to have learned anything from his conviction.

It depends to what extent you get drunk. If you're a little tipsy, you're obviously still in control of your actions. If you're completely wasted to the point where you barely have any control over your body - which is the situation we're talking about - then the person in question isn't much more in control of themselves than someone who is unconscious. They are not in the position to consent. Therefore, you have having non-consentual sex which is, by definition, rape. If you had no control of your body, I don't think you'd appreciate strangers assaulting you either.

If you are drunk and you give consent then you give consent. A person is liable for their actions while drunk. Unless they were drugged then the person must accept full responsibility.

There's a difference between "not consenting" (because you are incapable of doing so at the time), and "not remembering consenting" (because the use of alcohol is affecting your memory).

I think the OP's complaint is therefore, how can she know she didn't consent if she doesn't even remember the incident? People do many things when they're drunk that they don't remember; and providing consent could well have been one of them.

How do you know that the girl didn't say kiss Evans before they got drunk together - leading him on. From what I recall this is what happened. At this point how about if Evans is intoxicated? Maybe he is so drunk and led on that he thinks he's in and why shouldn't he in that case if she gave him all the right signals? I mean how can a seriously drunken bloke determine whether a girl who has kissed and smooched up to him in the night is ready for sex or not? How do you know that the girl being super drunk didn't invite sex even more strongly as a result of her drunkenness, ntoto the awareness of a drunken Evans. You don't know anything. You CANNOT determine the truth just by your ridiculous logic of a girl who gets intoxicated is not in a state to mentally comprehend if she wants sex or not. By your logic every ONS is a rape because the girls will be intoxicated and many of them very much so!

There's a difference between "not consenting" (because you are incapable of doing so at the time), and "not remembering consenting" (because the use of alcohol is affecting your memory).

I think the OP's complaint is therefore, how can she know she didn't consent if she doesn't even remember the incident? People do many things when they're drunk that they don't remember; and providing consent could well have been one of them.

That might be your opinion (which I disagree with) but it isn't the law. The law states that "[if] the compliant has temporarily lost her capacity to choose whether to have intercourse on the relevant occasion, she is not consenting... this would be rape". I think Judges in a court of law understand the situation a bit better than you.

That might be your opinion (which I disagree with) but it isn't the law. The law states that "[if] the compliant has temporarily lost her capacity to choose whether to have intercourse on the relevant occasion, she is not consenting... this would be rape". I think Judges in a court of law understand the situation a bit better than you.

That might be your opinion (which I disagree with) but it isn't the law. The law states that "[if] the compliant has temporarily lost her capacity to choose whether to have intercourse on the relevant occasion, she is not consenting... this would be rape". I think Judges in a court of law understand the situation a bit better than you.




You all seem to be forgetting that this has all passed through a court of law. All of the decisions were legally sound. I am quite certain that it is not difficult to realise when someone is completely drunk. If you're with someone who is clearly out of their mind - which she must have been if she genuinely couldn't remember the incident - then you don't have sex with them, simple as. It's completely irrelevant if she claimed to consent in that state of mind, legally speaking she was not able to consent. Claiming that this wasn't rape is just like claiming intercourse with a 14 year old isn't rape because they 'consented'. In neither case is the individual able to give consent, so both cases are rape. Saying "Yes" is not consent if you're not physically able to give consent.

Excuse me? Read what I said and then read what you posted. I said if they give consent then it is consent. To give consent meant they would've been in their fafaculties to make a choice no? If a person is really drunk and says "Yes I want sexy time" she made a choice and has thus given consent.

Better check your understanding of English.

You are forgetting that there is a re-trial as well then..

The law also favours women unfairly when it comes to divorce, money proceeds and child custody

....

If you're with someone who is clearly out of their mind - which she must have been if she genuinely couldn't remember the incident - then you don't have sex with them, simple as.

OK so what if Evans was 'clearly out of his mind' - I mean if she can't remember the event why would Evans remember such fine details?

You're being one sided.

If you are not in the state of mind to make a decision and you say "Yes", you are not making a decision any more than someone who is sleep-talking is making the decision to say what they're saying. If you are not in the mental state to give consent - which was correct in this case - then the individual could not physically have given consent, even if what they said indicated that they did.



The re-trial hasn't reached any conclusion yet. As far as I'm concerned, the only conclusion that matter is the conclusion of the first trial that led to his conviction.


And the relevance of that to this case is what?

He wasn't though. This was a full trial in court. Judges don't make decisions because they hate men, they make decisions in full accordance with the law. The fact that Evans was convicted means that this was a case of rape and he therefore was in the mental state to make a decision.

You said the law understand better than you. So by that accoutn every incident that passes through law including unfair advantages women have in court are fair? Get a grip lad!

You're an idiot you don't even know the case it wad a jury that determined he was guilty.

How do you know that the girl didn't say kiss Evans before they got drunk together - leading him on. From what I recall this is what happened.