Author Topic: The Band Wagon  (Read 475 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline shnozzola

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3317
  • Darwins +277/-2
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #29 on: October 11, 2018, 05:18:07 PM »
   At a party in college, a pretty girl kissed me.  We were both drunk.  We left, went to another party, and, well, ended up naked on my bed.  At THE point, she said, " I don't think we should do this," I said, "OK, I want to," and she said, "Me too, but we shouldn't".  So I said OK, and we stopped, because of respect for each other, as simple as that. 

        If you believe Cristina is telling the truth, then that is it.   If you don't believe her testimony, that's a different story. If you believe she was afraid and yelled, then that is it.    If you believe she didn't want this, and Brett didn't care - he shouldn't be a supreme court justice, as simple as that.

        Like the Bob Seger song - "I used her and she used me and neither one cared".  That's fine.  If one cares, and the other doesn't, that is the line.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 05:22:14 PM by shnozzola »
We have guided missiles and misguided men.  ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Who cares if Kim Jung-Un gets a nuke. Nukes don’t kill people, people kill people.”

Offline The Gawd

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1681
  • Darwins +152/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #30 on: October 11, 2018, 07:21:18 PM »
I'll be honest, I am skeptical about what happened here. Using my experience of high school/college I can piece together something that I don't necessarily consider rape or even attempted rape.

Using my experience with high school/college/family full of privileged, wealthy, white young men, I'm familiar with too many stories just like this and worse to count this one out. But these are my experiences and those are your experiences and neither of us should conflate ours with Ford's.

No, we shouldn't conflate our experience with hers, but part of us coming to conclusions on anything is applying our experience. Part of the reason I don't buy the Yahweh/Jesus story is because I haven't experienced the fanciful stories others claim to have experienced with him/them. Conversely I have experienced discrimination and thus can use that experience and apply it to women or the LGBT community or any other marginalized group and see their concerns.

One thing that does worry me about some of the allegations that have come out recently are that it seems that trying to sleep with someone is being equated with attempted rape at the worst case or inappropriate in the best case.

This age-old, time-honored image of the dangerous woman has evolved over the years. Women have been accused of being a Jezebel to being a witch to taking jobs from men, gleefully killing our babies, and now we are wantonly accusing men of violent crimes for self-gain or to appease regret. This trope only functions to reinforce the fear that the proud or independent woman will upset society. If only we kept our place in the kitchen, the conspiracy goes, the world would be a safer place. I would encourage you to refer to Wright's post here that starts the conversation off about the reality of false accusations.
I don't think I have put forth such an image at all, but this may be a blind spot for me. And I certainly never hinted that women "keep their place in the kitchen". There is quite a middle ground between "unwanted or unrequited sexual advances aren't necessarily rape" and "keep these Jezebel witches in the kitchen" and it's offensive to suggest I said the latter. You're talking to a father of a 15 year old girl, and the uncle of two pre-teen nieces, and the older brother to two sisters. All of them should be able to walk ass naked through a party drunk without being sexually assaulted. But if they decide to sleep with a guy or 10 because they are drunk the drunkenness is not an excuse for poor decisions.

If Kavanaugh and Ford were both at a party drinking, and maybe they get physical and perhaps are kissing and making their way to a bedroom, they get there and Brett wants to take it further and she doesn't. He goes for articles of clothing, she says no or resists and he gives up and goes back to the party. Is that attempted rape? Now obviously putting a hand over her mouth would change the dynamics.

Indeed. But even if he didn't, her testimony illustrated sexual assault.
So, what you are saying is attempting to have sex is rape. I flat out disagree. They're doing stuff, he tries to take it further, she says no, he stops... is not rape. Unless there's something I missed? Did he force her to the room?

Perhaps I am wrong, but I do see that different from approaching a women in a dark parking lot and forcing yourself on her. If these are the same please show me where I error.

Rape is sexual activity without consent. One does not deserve consent, one should never feel that consent is owed them. Consent can be and often is revoked at any time a woman or man feels uncomfortable or in danger or for any reason at all. By Ford's testimony, she did not regret an encounter with Kavanaugh because she never consented to it in the first place.

What is sexual activity? Actually, I just went back and listened to Ford's testimony again. I don't think I ever heard the beginning how she got into the room previously and I filled that in with what I know from parties I've attended. And that changes everything on this specific case, but not my overriding issue.

I have known of situations where a girl or young woman has slept with several people at a setting. Hell, I've been victim to what some would consider rape in that I've drunk too much and ended up doing something I wouldn't have done sober, and she was sober. I made a poor decision while drunk. If I go out drinking and then decide to drive and something happens I have to take responsibility for my drunk decisions, correct?

It sounds like you're assuming most people conflate rape with regret. It sounds horrific when priests say this about the teenagers and children they groom and assault, but is somehow fair game when used against women.

No, I am not assuming that at all. I am speaking on a specific type of accusation. The one where people get intoxicated willingly and make a poor decision. I do disagree that someone who is under the influence of alcohol or drugs (willingly) cannot give consent in the same way that I think someone under the influence can consent to driving. Poor decision? Yes. Still their decision none-the-less and they are held responsible for that decision. I also disagree that in a situation when a man and women are BOTH drinking/on drugs and they have sex that he automatically raped her (which is what was taught in my Women's Studies course in college).

I do believe this is different from the Catholic Church rapes in that in those situations we're talking about a power dynamic. So those situations are more like the Harvey Weinstein thing or even Bill Clinton.

Because coerced consent is not consent, whether by physical force or power dynamics.
I never mentioned physical force. We were discussing the "cant give consent because I was under the influence" 'rape'.

Far be it for me to defend this clown Kavanaugh, but I think we need to have a real conversation about sexual assault and rape because it is extremely one sided right now and the results of a false accusation can be catastrophic.

I disagree profoundly that it is one sided now. It sounds as if you are concerned women suddenly have, or will soon have power en masse because a few high-profile events have unloaded a barrage of copy-cat accusers to start targeting men who won't be believed because fuck men. The most recent studies available suggest 15-20% of women in the US will be the victims of rape at least once in her lifetime, and that statistic is likely much higher as we know the crime of rape is grossly under reported (wiki). One study showed police departments may eliminate or undercount rapes from official records to foster the appearance of successfully fighting violent crimes. Reports suggest between 2% and 10% of accusations of rape are concluded by law officials to be false (wiki).

I think rather men are starting to feel vulnerable for the first time. Men have always enjoyed the privilege of believability and advantage of the silence of the women and men they assault. Now this privilege is being called into question; it is starting to be denied. Meanwhile, women are still very unlikely to report, and statistically overwhelmingly unlikely to see any recourse for having reported sexual assault. Melania Trump even said women should have lots of hard evidence if they claim assault. Good god, that's as bad as the muslims who demand four eye-witnesses to even consider such a claim. What a fantastically effective way to shame the victim and keep her or him silent.
[edit: ugh, typos]
Again, didn't hear the very beginning of Ford's testimony so I can't and won't use Kavanaugh as an example of what I am talking about.

As for the rest of this comment, it is extremely unfair and unsubstantiated to suggest I fear women getting power. The discussion however is extremely one sided. This is exemplified by the fact that asking for due process is viewed as defending rape. Your extremely biased view is on full display when you completely disregard my "rape" as regret. All while under the guise of believing and standing up for rape victims. My point in mentioning my rape was to show that using that particular definition rape is unfair and even people who think they're standing up for rape victims won't honor it when the roles are reversed. Rape is a serious charge and should be reported every time, but those being accused need to be given due process before having their life destroyed.

We all view the world through our own experiences and filters. I know one filter I view this through is someone who understands what can happen when people simply accept accusations on their face.

My question to you is, what should happen when someone is accused of rape? Is it your stance that they just be thrown in prison with the maximum sentence without a trial? What would be enough evidence to convict someone of rape? Should I go and file a police report on the woman who raped me?

Offline Timo

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1801
  • Darwins +155/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Ya tu sabes
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #31 on: October 12, 2018, 03:38:36 AM »
If Kavanaugh and Ford were both at a party drinking, and maybe they get physical and perhaps are kissing and making their way to a bedroom, they get there and Brett wants to take it further and she doesn't. He goes for articles of clothing, she says no or resists and he gives up and goes back to the party. Is that attempted rape? Now obviously putting a hand over her mouth would change the dynamics.

Is that what she alleged though? She said that she went by herself upstairs to use the bathroom and Kavanaugh or Judge pushed her into a bedroom across the hall. We're not even talking about someone starting something and getting second thoughts, with their partner drunkenly not stopping soon enough. And Kavanaugh's defense isn't that it went down like you said. He said the party never happened. I don't know where this scenario is supposed to have come from.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I do see that different from approaching a women in a dark parking lot and forcing yourself on her. If these are the same please show me where I error.

You're wrong.

Are we the only two black men on this site? What if I were to say that, you know what, everything short of burning a cross on my lawn grass strip isn't racism. See what I'm doing is defining down racism to only be the most obvious version of racism. You're doing the same thing with rape and sexual assault. Anything short of a stranger approaching in the dark isn't rape. I mean, come on dude. I know you know that the vast majority of victims of sexual assault are victimized by someone they know. And this whole bit ignores the fact that there is such a thing as date rape.

Yo, watch the beginning of Dr. Ford's testimony and tell me if your girl or one of your nieces told you a story like that you wouldn't call that sexual assault.

Hell, I've been victim to what some would consider rape in that I've drunk too much and ended up doing something I wouldn't have done sober, and she was sober. I made a poor decision while drunk. If I go out drinking and then decide to drive and something happens I have to take responsibility for my drunk decisions, correct?

No. It sounds more like you were taken advantage of.

And to go to your analogy, if say you and me were drinking and I know you're too drunk to drive because you're kind of sloppy and I'm barely buzzed, and I go ahead and give you your keys anyway, am I not culpable? I'm not sure how the law would work there though.

I do believe this is different from the Catholic Church rapes in that in those situations we're talking about a power dynamic. So those situations are more like the Harvey Weinstein thing or even Bill Clinton.

My guy, she's talking about her 15 year old self against two 17 year old boys, football players. I mean Kavanaugh spent half of his testimony talking about how much he worked out. What are you talking about, power dynamics? They physically overpowered her.

Far be it for me to defend this clown Kavanaugh, but I think we need to have a real conversation about sexual assault and rape because it is extremely one sided right now and the results of a false accusation can be catastrophic.

Sort of, but not really. I feel pretty comfortable saying that I'm probably the only one here that's been falsely accused by a girl of a sexual assault and was almost taken to court over it. In my case, it was when I was a teenager. Me and this girl messed around at a get together not unlike the one Dr. Ford described...although I'm not sure where the nearest country club would have been. Word got around that things happened. Her parents found out like a week later and when she fessed up to some of it, she had it like she was too drunk to know what she was doing. They were very rightly upset and wanted me under the jail. Once they started to get the law involved, she came clean. We're still cool. We were kids. And I completely understand where she was coming from. She was scared. I was a bad kid as a teenager. She was an honor student with all of that first generation immigrant weight on her shoulders.

I say that to say this. What happened to me happens to almost no one. If you're going by the available evidence, it's much more likely that you or whatever man you're fretting over will himself be assaulted than falsely accused.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 03:47:53 AM by Timo »
Nah son...

Offline The Gawd

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1681
  • Darwins +152/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #32 on: October 12, 2018, 06:24:37 AM »
If Kavanaugh and Ford were both at a party drinking, and maybe they get physical and perhaps are kissing and making their way to a bedroom, they get there and Brett wants to take it further and she doesn't. He goes for articles of clothing, she says no or resists and he gives up and goes back to the party. Is that attempted rape? Now obviously putting a hand over her mouth would change the dynamics.

Is that what she alleged though? She said that she went by herself upstairs to use the bathroom and Kavanaugh or Judge pushed her into a bedroom across the hall. We're not even talking about someone starting something and getting second thoughts, with their partner drunkenly not stopping soon enough. And Kavanaugh's defense isn't that it went down like you said. He said the party never happened. I don't know where this scenario is supposed to have come from.
I missed the very beginning of her testimony and addressed it on my follow up.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I do see that different from approaching a women in a dark parking lot and forcing yourself on her. If these are the same please show me where I error.

You're wrong.

Are we the only two black men on this site? What if I were to say that, you know what, everything short of burning a cross on my lawn grass strip isn't racism. See what I'm doing is defining down racism to only be the most obvious version of racism. You're doing the same thing with rape and sexual assault. Anything short of a stranger approaching in the dark isn't rape. I mean, come on dude. I know you know that the vast majority of victims of sexual assault are victimized by someone they know. And this whole bit ignores the fact that there is such a thing as date rape.

Yo, watch the beginning of Dr. Ford's testimony and tell me if your girl or one of your nieces told you a story like that you wouldn't call that sexual assault.

Not exactly. I was referring to a specific accusation in which an accuser claims to not be able to give consent due to being under the influence. As for the Kavanaugh situation, I initially thought it was similar to the situation you describe later in your response.

Hell, I've been victim to what some would consider rape in that I've drunk too much and ended up doing something I wouldn't have done sober, and she was sober. I made a poor decision while drunk. If I go out drinking and then decide to drive and something happens I have to take responsibility for my drunk decisions, correct?

No. It sounds more like you were taken advantage of.

And to go to your analogy, if say you and me were drinking and I know you're too drunk to drive because you're kind of sloppy and I'm barely buzzed, and I go ahead and give you your keys anyway, am I not culpable? I'm not sure how the law would work there though.
That is in the definition of rape and what I was taught is rape in my Women's Studies course. It is also the specific type of rape I am addressing. As for the analogy, if I decide to drive drunk I am culpable for that decision. I cannot appeal to not being able to decide to drive because I was drunk. As far as I know, unless you were a bartender serving me the drinks, you would not be responsible for my drunk decision (per my bartending/alcohol serving licensing course).

I do believe this is different from the Catholic Church rapes in that in those situations we're talking about a power dynamic. So those situations are more like the Harvey Weinstein thing or even Bill Clinton.

My guy, she's talking about her 15 year old self against two 17 year old boys, football players. I mean Kavanaugh spent half of his testimony talking about how much he worked out. What are you talking about, power dynamics? They physically overpowered her.
Yes, when I went back to catch the very beginning of her testimony I see that. What I had previously heard began with them already in the room. Which is why my description of the party scene didn't add up to her testimony.

Far be it for me to defend this clown Kavanaugh, but I think we need to have a real conversation about sexual assault and rape because it is extremely one sided right now and the results of a false accusation can be catastrophic.

Sort of, but not really. I feel pretty comfortable saying that I'm probably the only one here that's been falsely accused by a girl of a sexual assault and was almost taken to court over it. In my case, it was when I was a teenager. Me and this girl messed around at a get together not unlike the one Dr. Ford described...although I'm not sure where the nearest country club would have been. Word got around that things happened. Her parents found out like a week later and when she fessed up to some of it, she had it like she was too drunk to know what she was doing. They were very rightly upset and wanted me under the jail. Once they started to get the law involved, she came clean. We're still cool. We were kids. And I completely understand where she was coming from. She was scared. I was a bad kid as a teenager. She was an honor student with all of that first generation immigrant weight on her shoulders.

I say that to say this. What happened to me happens to almost no one. If you're going by the available evidence, it's much more likely that you or whatever man you're fretting over will himself be assaulted than falsely accused.
You are not the only one in the country that has ended up in that situation. A simple google search will show you that. But you are exactly what I am talking about. It may be a small percentage that it happens, but the fact that it happens is why we have due process. Or would you prefer to go back to the days no due process was afforded?

Also, based on what albeto has said you would be guilty of rape. Apparently you have to get verbal consent before you do anything because once you go past whatever the other person is okay with you are guilty of rape. The problem is these interactions simply don't happen at negotiation tables with lawyers present and contracts. You and a girl are making out (despite not getting verbal consent for that either) you reach for the blouse, she says no, you immediately stop, you are a rapist.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 06:44:35 AM by The Gawd »

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #33 on: October 12, 2018, 12:08:45 PM »
No, we shouldn't conflate our experience with hers, but part of us coming to conclusions on anything is applying our experience. Part of the reason I don't buy the Yahweh/Jesus story is because I haven't experienced the fanciful stories others claim to have experienced with him/them. Conversely I have experienced discrimination and thus can use that experience and apply it to women or the LGBT community or any other marginalized group and see their concerns.

Good points, and I don't discount anecdotal evidence per se, but I believe the difference lies in how much of your own personal experience/belief you're assuming is universal in this event. With regard to the god delusion, your personal experience is corroborated by evidence. Not experiencing miracles fits snuggly into reality as we know it and can observe and even test for it. I don't deny false accusations occur and ruin lives, I do not agree that happens so often that claims of rape ought to be automatically suspect unless they fit a very narrow definition of rape such as an assailant approaching a women in a dark parking lot and forcing himself on her.

I don't think I have put forth such an image at all, but this may be a blind spot for me. And I certainly never hinted that women "keep their place in the kitchen". There is quite a middle ground between "unwanted or unrequited sexual advances aren't necessarily rape" and "keep these Jezebel witches in the kitchen" and it's offensive to suggest I said the latter. You're talking to a father of a 15 year old girl, and the uncle of two pre-teen nieces, and the older brother to two sisters. All of them should be able to walk ass naked through a party drunk without being sexually assaulted. But if they decide to sleep with a guy or 10 because they are drunk the drunkenness is not an excuse for poor decisions.

I'm sorry I wasn't clearer. The argument you're putting forth is, I submit, founded on these fears. It is the argument itself I'm going after, and I didn't think you realized just how well it fits in with the history of identifying and oppressing "dangerous" women. Dangerous here being understood as one who could upset the privilege of men in society (from Mary Wollstonecraft to Margaret Sanger to Gloria Steinem), or a man of some power (ie, Dr. Ford). 

So, what you are saying is attempting to have sex is rape. I flat out disagree. They're doing stuff, he tries to take it further, she says no, he stops... is not rape. Unless there's something I missed? Did he force her to the room?

I'm not suggesting attempting to have sex is rape (how did you get that, btw?), but your illustration of "they're doing stuff, he tries to take it further, she says no, he stops" is simply not in conformity with the testimony Dr. Ford gave. I know you said you hadn't really heard the beginning of her story and I assume by now you have, but I'll post part of the transcript here for the sake of others following the discussion or wanting to join in:

Quote
Early in the evening, I went up a very narrow set of stairs leading from the living room to a second floor to use the restroom. When I got to the top of the stairs, I was pushed from behind into a bedroom across from the bathroom. I couldn’t see who pushed me. Brett and Mark came into the bedroom and locked the door behind them.

There was music playing in the bedroom. It was turned up louder by either Brett or Mark once we were in the room.

I was pushed onto the bed, and Brett got on top of me. He began running his hands over my body and grinding into me. I yelled, hoping that someone downstairs might hear me, and I tried to get away from him, but his weight was heavy.

Brett groped me and tried to take off my clothes. He had a hard time, because he was very inebriated, and because I was wearing a one-piece bathing suit underneath my clothing.

I believed he was going to rape me.

I tried to yell for help. When I did, Brett put his hand over my mouth to stop me from yelling. This is what terrified me the most, and has had the most lasting impact on my life. It was hard for me to breathe, and I thought that Brett was accidentally going to kill me.

There is nothing in this account that even remotely indicates misunderstood consent or regret after the fact. This is textbook assault and only vary narrowly misses the criteria for your own acceptance of rape. The only difference here was the location (house not parking lot) and the assailant was known. I do consider this attempted rape. I do not consider this a case of two people fooling around, one asks the other to stop and he complies. I can't understand how it could ever be seen in that light.

What is sexual activity? Actually, I just went back and listened to Ford's testimony again. I don't think I ever heard the beginning how she got into the room previously and I filled that in with what I know from parties I've attended. And that changes everything on this specific case, but not my overriding issue.

Sure, I get and appreciate that, but I still reject your overriding issue. I reject it because these are all too often the circumstances in which women find themselves blamed for accusing their assailants. I reject it because the data shows this concern of rampant false accusations is far less likely to happen than sexual assault. I reject it because it blames the victim. I reject it because while it plays into legitimate existing fears of unjust incarceration, it identifies sexually active women as being the dangerous "other." It's divisive and hostile and perpetuates fear-mongering. It's no different than identifying Mexicans or Muslims or young black men in hoodies or gay men holding hands as the dangerous "other" to watch out for and suppress before they unleash their evil ways and ruin everyone's lives.

No, I am not assuming that at all. I am speaking on a specific type of accusation. The one where people get intoxicated willingly and make a poor decision. I do disagree that someone who is under the influence of alcohol or drugs (willingly) cannot give consent in the same way that I think someone under the influence can consent to driving. Poor decision? Yes. Still their decision none-the-less and they are held responsible for that decision. I also disagree that in a situation when a man and women are BOTH drinking/on drugs and they have sex that he automatically raped her (which is what was taught in my Women's Studies course in college).

We are in agreement here.

Again, didn't hear the very beginning of Ford's testimony so I can't and won't use Kavanaugh as an example of what I am talking about.

When I replied to your post, you started off saying "I'll be honest, I am skeptical about what happened here. Using my experience of high school/college I can piece together something that I don't necessarily consider rape or even attempted rape." This is the argument to which I've been replying. That you have since changed your mind when new information was presented and accepted is the very motivation I was going by when I shared the data about percentages. I understand you to no long support this idea, and I'm glad of it, but please understand this was the impetus for my reply.

I agree false accusations can be and are catastrophic, but I do not agree it is a great as you assume (which is why I offered stats), nor do I believe it justifies the trivialization and excusing of the millions of experiences like Ford's in order to do so, and argument you had been putting forth does just that in my opinion. It does that by implying her experiences was best explained by regret, an event requires more limited parameters to be considered a legitimate rape, and the real threat lies in wait for the man because god forbid the woman changes her mind the next morning. I'm glad you've changed your mind, but that was the argument to which I was responding.

As for the rest of this comment, it is extremely unfair and unsubstantiated to suggest I fear women getting power. The discussion however is extremely one sided. This is exemplified by the fact that asking for due process is viewed as defending rape. Your extremely biased view is on full display when you completely disregard my "rape" as regret. All while under the guise of believing and standing up for rape victims. My point in mentioning my rape was to show that using that particular definition rape is unfair and even people who think they're standing up for rape victims won't honor it when the roles are reversed. Rape is a serious charge and should be reported every time, but those being accused need to be given due process before having their life destroyed.

I'm not sure I follow you here. Are you identifying as a victim of rape, or making a point? I guess it doesn't really matter; I do not agree that drunk = rape or that asking for due process = defending rape. I don't know if you consented to the event to which you refer. I am completely unfamiliar with any of the details, nor am I asking for them. I don't think sobriety is required for consent and I'm not sure why you assume I do. Somewhere we got our lines crossed and you're arguing against things I neither said nor believe.

« Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 12:27:39 PM by albeto »

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #34 on: October 12, 2018, 12:13:52 PM »
Also, based on what albeto has said you would be guilty of rape.

Incorrect.

Apparently you have to get verbal consent before you do anything because once you go past whatever the other person is okay with you are guilty of rape. The problem is these interactions simply don't happen at negotiation tables with lawyers present and contracts. You and a girl are making out (despite not getting verbal consent for that either) you reach for the blouse, she says no, you immediately stop, you are a rapist.

Apparent to whom? Not the law, not the vast majority of society. I can't imagine how this could be argued morally or even logically. If you're referring to that one class you took in college, that hardly has any authority in the courts. If you're referring to comments you hear around here and there, please stop imposing them onto me. I don't support this.

Offline The Gawd

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1681
  • Darwins +152/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #35 on: October 12, 2018, 01:52:59 PM »
@albeto

Allow me to hit the reset button. My initial skepticism in the Ford/Kavanaugh issue was a skepticism of what to call what happened. This was primarily due to not originally knowing that she was pushed into the room and hadn't gone in there as a willing participant. I agree with you that consent is not owed and can be given or taken at any point. I don't even know that it's my position to comment on or confirm such an idea as I look at it like I look at marriage equality or abortion--it's just none of my business to even have an opinion on what others do with their body.

I would say I have two concerns when it comes to the recent discussions on sexual assault. To me, protecting victims of crimes goes without saying so I don't necessarily comment on what I think is clear we agree on. Therefore the Harvey Weinstein stuff, Bill Clinton stuff, grabbing women by their parts stuff, Catholic priests, exposing ones self in the work place, date rape drugs, wearing skimpy outfits at parties, etc I agree with you on in no uncertain terms.

The two concerns are scenarios where someone claims they couldn't have given consent because they were under the influence of something. I wholeheartedly disagree because we cannot use that argument in other situations like drunk driving. I am always responsible for my actions drunk or sober.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rape
rape noun (1)
\?r?p  \
Definition of rape (Entry 1 of 4)
1 : unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against a person's will or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception — compare SEXUAL ASSAULT, STATUTORY RAPE
2 : an outrageous violation
3 : an act or instance of robbing or despoiling or carrying away a person by force

As you can see the #1 definition of rape includes exactly what I am referring to. Based on that definition I am a rape victim. Do I consider myself a rape victim? No, I made a poor decision. Though I don't consider myself a rape victim that episode has certainly changed how I behave on both sides of that equation.

The 2nd concern is how we as a society categorize unrequited sexual advances. Believe me, I was f'ing shocked and appalled when I learned recently that in corporate settings men were sitting around exposing themselves to women as some sort of mating tactic. It never occurred to me that was even an option. And I am still befuddled by it. Let me tell you something about me, I absolutely hate kissing unless I am really into her. To me it's one of the most intimate things people do. While in Cancun at some club some cutie pie randomly kissed me, tongue and all. Turns out she and her friends had a bet on who could kiss the most guys, there was literally thousands of people in these 3 connected clubs. I'm a germaphobe, I immediately bought two shots to kill the germs, I wanted to die. That is unconsentual sexual contact, but I wouldn't categorize it as rape. If I could have her arrested and charged with anything I wouldn't.

Now I fully acknowledge that my experience as a man is completely different than a woman's especially sexually and I probably could never know understand. But earlier this year when it seemed like accusations were coming out everyday, some of them were about getting kissed without consent or asses grabbed in a club. What I am asking is can we allow that to be different from rape? Is smacking an ass in the club jail and sex offender registry worthy?

Dave Chappelle had a bit in one of his Netflix specials where he talks about getting paid several thousands of dollars in cash from a set and he's walking around New York City with it all in his backpack. And he then realized what it was like to be a woman because he had something on him that everyone wanted. I thought it was funny and insightful, however one may feel about Dave.

Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps that's my male privilege talking. But as in most topics I am willing to discuss and come to a better understanding.

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #36 on: October 12, 2018, 04:14:17 PM »
As you can see the #1 definition of rape includes exactly what I am referring to. Based on that definition I am a rape victim. Do I consider myself a rape victim? No, I made a poor decision. Though I don't consider myself a rape victim that episode has certainly changed how I behave on both sides of that equation.

I hear you. According to statistics too I am a survivor of sexual assault if we are going to define it as unwanted contact, physical or verbal, of a sexsual nature. My younger self learned to stand on the bus in such a way as to minimize the likelihood of the next asshole grabbing or pinching my ass. I've been "va-va-va-voomed" and told I had nice tits, too bad my face was so ugly. I don't consider myself a victim of sexual assault any more than you consider yourself a victim of rape, even if it does fit some (I think) extreme definition. I feel that completely trivializes what sexual assault is, and I don't want to contribute to that if I can help it.

Perhaps it's because I'm a third generation feminist, or a second-wave feminist (I think I have that right, lol), or an older lady now, but I don't agree with a lot of the arguments being put forth on social media either. Like you, I think they are extreme and in some cases absurd. But that's how I see these Great Conversations go. People take elements of an argument and push the envelope. In my lifetime I've seen the argument about a woman "asking for it" because of the clothes she wears or her desire to climb the corporate ladder turn 180 degrees precisely because that envelope was pushed. There are other envelopes that get pushed but fizzle out (remember "Atheism +"?). But society is never stagnant.

I think social media makes these conversations go so much faster, almost breakneck speed, and we as a society need to take the time for everyone to catch up and contribute to the conversation. I just don't share the same fear as relayed in the OP that because a few high profile cases have become newsworthy, now the parameters have been changed and women are holding men hostage. And I don't share the same idea as you that alcohol affects culpability with regard to driving and sexual assault equally.

The 2nd concern is how we as a society categorize unrequited sexual advances. Believe me, I was f'ing shocked and appalled when I learned recently that in corporate settings men were sitting around exposing themselves to women as some sort of mating tactic. It never occurred to me that was even an option. And I am still befuddled by it.

That made me chuckle. It also makes me wince because recently I heard a sister of mine say, "that's just how men are." I mean, what kind of awful, misogynistic environment does she live in if this is typical of the men in her life and she this is normal for her? It's not how we grew up. That's not how my father acted. I know my mother would never have tolerated it. I think it's part and parcel with her church culture. It's one of the ideas that excuses patriarchy: Boys will be boys. Whattaya gonna do? The answer is of course you wear modest clothes, you don't dare give the appearance of flirting, and you accept culpability when men take advantage of you because you led them on somehow.

Most men I know and relate to are like you - these kinds of thoughts would just never cross their minds. I think it's because there exists a fundamental respect for women. It's one reason I was surprised to see the argument you had originally presented as it fits in with this "dangerous women" trope that is in cahoots with this "boys will be boys" mentality. I think for the same reason you wouldn't take advantage of a woman regardless how drunk she is - not because of germs, but because there's a fundamental respect for a woman's ownership of her own body just like yours - I don't think we should excuse when other men take advantage of a woman or man, regardless of how drunk the victim may be.

Now I fully acknowledge that my experience as a man is completely different than a woman's especially sexually and I probably could never know understand. But earlier this year when it seemed like accusations were coming out everyday, some of them were about getting kissed without consent or asses grabbed in a club. What I am asking is can we allow that to be different from rape? Is smacking an ass in the club jail and sex offender registry worthy?

I quite agree with you, but let's take a breath here and remember what the risk of being falsely accused really is (between 2% - 10%, like all federal crimes). Let's remember that trivializing a victim's assault is never justifiable to placate personal fears. Let's remember it usually takes much more than a mere accusation to get law enforcement involved, so the idea a woman can walk into a police station and demand her neighbor, coworker, or mailman get thrown into jail is illogical. Therefore, the idea that women are now dangerous to all men good and true amounts to nothing more than slut shaming and victim blaming. The evidence simply doesn't support these conspiracies.

Dave Chappelle had a bit in one of his Netflix specials where he talks about getting paid several thousands of dollars in cash from a set and he's walking around New York City with it all in his backpack. And he then realized what it was like to be a woman because he had something on him that everyone wanted. I thought it was funny and insightful, however one may feel about Dave.

Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps that's my male privilege talking. But as in most topics I am willing to discuss and come to a better understanding.

That's a pretty clever comparison, and humorous as well. And I'm glad we have taken the opportunity to really ferret out what each of us thinks and supports. Look at that, godless atheists with manners. Now, who's got the BBQ sauce for the literal baby back ribs?
« Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 04:25:10 PM by albeto »

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4722
  • Darwins +474/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #37 on: October 13, 2018, 09:35:05 PM »
The issue of whether Kavanaugh "blacked out" or even entered a state where memory formation was poor enough that he simply forgot, is just a polite way of saying he isn't deliberately lying. But if you are in a "he said she said" accusation situation, it can be reasonably guessed that he would lie anyway. There is no point asking the accused that particular question, except to get it on the record. You have to rely on other evidence, if you believe the testimony of a woman doesn't count for anything certain. His actions certainly aren't Christian.

Trial standard is "reasonable doubt", which is a low bar. Supreme court standard should be higher, since you don't want doubtful judges.

Republicans know they are about to lose the house, so that's what it's all about. Should his reputation be trashed to stop that? Well, it didn't work. You now have a supreme court judge with a trashed reputation.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/senate/

I like the ideas that some Democrats have of expanding the supreme court to 10, dividing California up into 40 states. What else can you do?
« Last Edit: October 13, 2018, 10:08:09 PM by Add Homonym »
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be bleedn obvious.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 9049
  • Darwins +446/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #38 on: October 14, 2018, 08:17:50 AM »

I like the ideas that some Democrats have of expanding the supreme court to 10, dividing California up into 40 states. What else can you do?

Abolish the electoral college.
Stop giving every unique state equal representation when they clearly do not have the population to warrant it.
Citizens United/Super PAC/Campaign Finance overhaul.
Eliminate Gerrymandering

This would effectively relegate the Republican Party to rethink its entire strategy and platform. There was a time when Republicans discussed things like inclusiveness and diversity for the sake of maintaining power. That time is long gone, so they are using every possible tactic to maintain power with their dwindling, racist, misogynistic base. Long gone are the centrist Republicans, replaced by a subgroup born from the Tea Party movement hell bent on oppression and elimination of anything that appears to be a government handout (unless it's a giant corporation, then shower them with cash).

Offline Timo

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1801
  • Darwins +155/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Ya tu sabes
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #39 on: October 14, 2018, 05:03:30 PM »
You are not the only one in the country that has ended up in that situation. A simple google search will show you that. But you are exactly what I am talking about. It may be a small percentage that it happens, but the fact that it happens is why we have due process. Or would you prefer to go back to the days no due process was afforded?

Yeah, as black men, we're in kind of a weird position. On the one hand, it's good that people believe women and what not. On the other hand, white folks have always believed white women accusing black men of just about anything.

Also, based on what albeto has said you would be guilty of rape. Apparently you have to get verbal consent before you do anything because once you go past whatever the other person is okay with you are guilty of rape. The problem is these interactions simply don't happen at negotiation tables with lawyers present and contracts. You and a girl are making out (despite not getting verbal consent for that either) you reach for the blouse, she says no, you immediately stop, you are a rapist.

Nah, I had consent and all that. Maybe I wasn't being clear. She was into it. She said yes. All that changed when her parents got wind of the fact that something happened because our dumb ass friends let everyone know that we went into a room together so, you know? She tried to change details to remove herself and her own responsibility from it and that's what made me end up sounding like a rapist. Like it wasn't even a malicious thing. This was the result of her being very shamed and embarrassed and talking to her parents.

But again, we're cool. And that experience is part of why I joined this forum in the first place. I don't think she would have acted the way she acted without that whole Catholic thing being in the background. She thought it was very bad that she did things with a boy and so she's bad, or something.
Nah son...

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4722
  • Darwins +474/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #40 on: October 14, 2018, 09:45:48 PM »

Abolish the electoral college.
Stop giving every unique state equal representation when they clearly do not have the population to warrant it.
Citizens United/Super PAC/Campaign Finance overhaul.
Eliminate Gerrymandering


Some of them require constitution changes which are near impossible in America. But more possible if you divide the progressive high population states up somehow.
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be bleedn obvious.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 9049
  • Darwins +446/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: The Band Wagon
« Reply #41 on: October 15, 2018, 06:12:25 AM »

Abolish the electoral college.
Stop giving every unique state equal representation when they clearly do not have the population to warrant it.
Citizens United/Super PAC/Campaign Finance overhaul.
Eliminate Gerrymandering


Some of them require constitution changes which are near impossible in America. But more possible if you divide the progressive high population states up somehow.

Indeed. I told some friends that the best way to get guns under control is to remove it from the Constitution. I know that will never happen, but one can dream! Out of one side, Republicans will say that guns need to be protected by the Constitution, and out of the other side they will ramble incessantly over how the free market will solve any problem. I say the free market will actually help with gun control by allowing state and federal legislation to control that market, along with the healthcare industry, science, and the people who overwhelmingly want something to be done.