Women think very little of eachother...

[@Li3n]

Seriously:

Women say some rape victims should take blame - survey

A majority of women believe some rape victims should take responsibility for what happened, a survey suggests.

Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility.
One-third blamed victims who had dressed provocatively or gone back to the attacker's house for a drink.
The survey of more than 1,000 people in London marked the 10th anniversary of the Haven service for rape victims.
More than half of those of both sexes questioned said there were some circumstances when a rape victim should accept responsibility for an attack.

Less forgiving
The study found that women were less forgiving of the victim than men.
Of the women who believed some victims should take responsibility, 71% thought a person should accept responsibility when getting into bed with someone, compared with 57% of men.
The survey also found more than one in 10 people were unsure whether they would report being raped to the police, and 2% said they would definitely not do so. The main reasons were being too embarrassed or ashamed (55%), wanting to forget it had happened (41%) and not wanting to go to court (38%).
Meanwhile, the survey suggested that many people are relaxed about their safety. Almost half of people have walked home via side streets on their own.
One in five has been so drunk they have lost their memory, while one in five has got into a taxi without checking whether it is licensed.

Hardening attitudes
When asked about their own experiences, more than a third of those polled said they had been in a situation where they could have been made to have sex against their will.
Women are more likely to have been in this situation - 40% compared to 20%.
And one in five adults had been in a situation where they were made to have sex when they did not want to. This had happened to more women (23%) than men (20%).
The online survey, titled Wake Up To Rape, polled 1,061 people aged 18 to 50, comprising 712 women and 349 men.
An Amnesty International report five years ago found that a significant minority of British people laid the blame for rape at victims themselves.
BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw says this latest study suggests attitudes may have hardened.
And the findings may help explain why juries are reluctant to convict in some rape trials.
Elizabeth Harrison from Haven said there was never an excuse for forcing a woman to do something she did not want to.
"Clearly, women are in a position where they need to take responsibility for themselves - but whatever you wear and whatever you do does not give somebody else the right to rape you.
"It's important people take the time to actually look at what they are doing and make sure the person they are with is actually wanting to go ahead with what they are proposing."

 

[bhamv3]

:wtf:

I have no words. This is messed up.

 

[GasBandit]

They say a misogynist is someone who holds the same opinion of women that other women do...

 

[Krisken]

They say a misogynist is someone who holds the same opinion of women that other women do...

Who are "they"? Misogynists?

 

[Espy]

They say a misogynist is someone who holds the same opinion of women that other women do...

Who are "they"? Misogynists?[/QUOTE]

You know, "They". "THEY". "They" are always saying stuff. It's just what "they" do. But seriously, this is gonna be a fun topic I'm sure. Can't wait to lock this one up. :sneaky:

 

[Adam]

Key quote:

"Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility."

Some, not all.

And yes, if you put yourself into a bad situation, you do accept some responsibility for it.

 

[Krisken]

They say a misogynist is someone who holds the same opinion of women that other women do...

Who are "they"? Misogynists?[/QUOTE]

You know, "They". "THEY". "They" are always saying stuff. It's just what "they" do. But seriously, this is gonna be a fun topic I'm sure. Can't wait to lock this one up. :sneaky:[/QUOTE]
Hehe, Yeah, I'll be keeping an eye on it for funsies. I should have used a smiley to show I was being silly. I tend to seem overly serious with my House avatar.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

Key quote:

"Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility."

Some, not all.

And yes, if you put yourself into a bad situation, you do accept some responsibility for it.

So you seriously think an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend would not be 100% responsible for a rape? Violent people and rapists don't wear big glowing signs that identify them as such (despite what hilarious Mr. Show sketches would lead you to believe). It's completely absurd to think that once someone sleeps with someone, they lose all ability to tell them no ever again without being blamed. That's fucking terrible.


And re: the article, women are not somehow exempt from being misogynists by a long shot. A lady I worked with was one of the worst people I've ever been around as far as saying "women shouldn't be leaders, I can't work for a female boss, they're all too emotional and they hate me since I'm prettier than them" and "women should never run for president, they'd launch a nuke every 4 weeks hahahahha". It's just as repugnant coming out of her mouth as any guy. And every time I would do some sort of slight double-take at what she said, she'd assure me "no, it's okay, I can say that, I'm a woman." No, it's not.

 

[GasBandit]

So you seriously think an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend would not be 100% responsible for a rape?

So what you're saying is that because someone has previously had sex with a woman, he's now completely incapable of misinterpreting mixed signals sent from his one-time lover, and thus must be held 100% accountable for rape when his ex-girlfriend gets drunk with him and they end up in bed once more?

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

I thought that question was referring to an attack that occurs within minutes after a woman gets into bed with the attacker, not anytime in the future afterwards.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

So you seriously think an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend would not be 100% responsible for a rape?

So what you're saying is that because someone has previously had sex with a woman, he's now completely incapable of misinterpreting mixed signals sent from his one-time lover, and thus must be held 100% accountable for rape when his ex-girlfriend gets drunk with him and they end up in bed once more?[/QUOTE]

I'm not gonna get into when someone's too drunk to give consent. I honestly don't have a super firm opinion on that. I'm mainly talking about rape cases where the girl clearly says "No" beforehand or when the guy drugs her by slipping her something that she doesn't ask for or know about. In those sort of cases, yes, the one-time lover would be 100% accountable.

 

[Chibibar]

So you seriously think an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend would not be 100% responsible for a rape?

So what you're saying is that because someone has previously had sex with a woman, he's now completely incapable of misinterpreting mixed signals sent from his one-time lover, and thus must be held 100% accountable for rape when his ex-girlfriend gets drunk with him and they end up in bed once more?[/QUOTE]

well... it is not all black and white.

Scenario A.
A guy and a girl dated and slept together with consent. Later she didn't think they are a good match move too fast and decides to slow down, the guy is pissed and she broke up with him. Later he broke into her home and rape her. How can she be accountable? The guy is 100% at fault.

Scenario B.
A guy and a girl dated and slept together with consent. Later, event (another encounter) he was being extra rough with her cause he likes it that way but she didn't. He overpower her and continues. This is less than 100% guy's fault. I would say 40/60

Scenario C.
A guy and a girl dated. The girl dress all sexy cause she want to impress him. He think she wanted to sleep with him and pursue it, she refuse, he attacks. this is a 50/50 deal since she did dress "sexy" for him to begin with. (IMO)

There are different type of scenarios where a guy could be 10% to 100% at fault.

 

[Adam]

Key quote:

"Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility."

Some, not all.

And yes, if you put yourself into a bad situation, you do accept some responsibility for it.

So you seriously think an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend would not be 100% responsible for a rape? Violent people and rapists don't wear big glowing signs that identify them as such (despite what hilarious Mr. Show sketches would lead you to believe). It's completely absurd to think that once someone sleeps with someone, they lose all ability to tell them no ever again without being blamed. That's fucking terrible.
[/QUOTE]

A woman has the right to say 'no' at any time and rape is a terrible crime that deserves to be punished.

However, if a drunk woman goes home with a drunk man, goes up to bed and then changes her mind halfway through, she does bear some responsibility for the situation.

Most incidences of rape are by someone known to the victim, whether a husband or a steady dating partner. Complete strangers actually make up a very small percentage of rapists. Add in alcohol and the likelihood of misunderstanding is pretty high.

 

[phil]

As much as one person should tease and provoke someone else sexually, that other person should never decide it's ok to rape someone.


If I leave my car door open, and leave the keys in the ignition, it's still illegal for someone else to steal it. Granted, I really should not leave my car in such a state, but that other person should also just not fucking steal my car.


Women shouldn't walk down an ally alone, wearing skimpy clothes and talking loudly about how drunk they are. A man seeing that should also not fucking rape her.

 

[Adam]

The article isn't about being raped by a complete stranger out of the blue.

"Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility."

Seems pretty non-controversial to me.

 

[Chibibar]

The article isn't about being raped by a complete stranger out of the blue.

"Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility."

Seems pretty non-controversial to me.

hence my scenario above. All of them relate that both of them "knew" each other on some level and consent at some point.

 

[GasBandit]

As much as one person should tease and provoke someone else sexually, that other person should never decide it's ok to rape someone.


If I leave my car door open, and leave the keys in the ignition, it's still illegal for someone else to steal it. Granted, I really should not leave my car in such a state, but that other person should also just not fucking steal my car.


Women shouldn't walk down an ally alone, wearing skimpy clothes and talking loudly about how drunk they are. A man seeing that should also not fucking rape her.

That was eloquently stated.

 

[Math242]

No means no.

 

[Adam]

The article isn't about being raped by a complete stranger out of the blue.

"Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility."

Seems pretty non-controversial to me.

hence my scenario above. All of them relate that both of them "knew" each other on some level and consent at some point.[/QUOTE]

I didn't really agree with any of your scenarios to be honest.

---------- Post added at 07:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:28 PM ----------

No means no.

That's really not the point of the article, but okay.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

So you seriously think an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend would not be 100% responsible for a rape?

So what you're saying is that because someone has previously had sex with a woman, he's now completely incapable of misinterpreting mixed signals sent from his one-time lover, and thus must be held 100% accountable for rape when his ex-girlfriend gets drunk with him and they end up in bed once more?[/QUOTE]

well... it is not all black and white.

Scenario A.
A guy and a girl dated and slept together with consent. Later she didn't think they are a good match move too fast and decides to slow down, the guy is pissed and she broke up with him. Later he broke into her home and rape her. How can she be accountable? The guy is 100% at fault.

Scenario B.
A guy and a girl dated and slept together with consent. Later, event (another encounter) he was being extra rough with her cause he likes it that way but she didn't. He overpower her and continues. This is less than 100% guy's fault. I would say 40/60

Scenario C.
A guy and a girl dated. The girl dress all sexy cause she want to impress him. He think she wanted to sleep with him and pursue it, she refuse, he attacks. this is a 50/50 deal since she did dress "sexy" for him to begin with. (IMO)

There are different type of scenarios where a guy could be 10% to 100% at fault.[/QUOTE]

Holy shit, these are absolutely terrible views to have. A woman can walk down the street completely naked and have the right to not get raped. If at any point someone says "no, stop", that is the end of consent. Do you realize what you're saying in Scenario B? You're saying that if a guy and a girl start making out, he automatically has some sort of right to do whatever he wants with her body.

A woman has the right to say 'no' at any time and rape is a terrible crime that deserves to be punished.

However, if a drunk woman goes home with a drunk man, goes up to bed and then changes her mind halfway through, she does bear some responsibility for the situation.

Most incidences of rape are by someone known to the victim, whether a husband or a steady dating partner. Complete strangers actually make up a very small percentage of rapists. Add in alcohol and the likelihood of misunderstanding is pretty high.

Being drunk is not really an excuse if the victim clearly says some form of "no, stop, I don't want to do this". If you get drunk and misunderstand how to drive a car, you're still 100% guilty! Or any other crime. If the girl in question changes her mind halfway through and says no after things have happened, even a drunk person has to stop, or be guilty.




edit: . Any sort of sexual assault charge ruins someone's life. It's completely abhorrent for someone to get accused of rape after a drunken one night stand the girl regrets a couple days later. Also, things like that do huge damage in undermining when actual sexual assaults occur. I imagine they also help foster horrible points of view like Chibi's.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

No means no.

Right. But what does means mean?

 

[Adam]

If you get drunk and misunderstand how to drive a car, you're still 100% guilty!

There are different charges for drinking and driving and hurting someone versus intentionally running someone down. My cousin just killed 2 people last weekend in a drinking and driving-related accident. He's going to jail, but not the same amount as if he had run them down purposefully.

 

[phil]

damn this thread moved quickly.

The article isn't about being raped by a complete stranger out of the blue.

"Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility."

Seems pretty non-controversial to me.

That's true.

What I was trying to get at was more the idea that the idea of assigned percent values as to who's fault it is that someone got raped is ridiculous because in the end it was still someone's decision to rape someone else.

 

[Troll]

If you get drunk and misunderstand how to drive a car, you're still 100% guilty!

There are different charges for drinking and driving and hurting someone versus intentionally running someone down. My cousin just killed 2 people last weekend in a drinking and driving-related accident. He's going to jail, but not the same amount as if he had run them down purposefully.[/QUOTE]

And do you think that any of the blame should fall on the people he hit with his car, because they were driving in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or were they driving in a provocative manner?

 

[Chibibar]

Lovely Boner: I am not saying the woman CAN'T say no, but it does not absolve her from all "guilt" of the situation. If she said no to begin with she wouldn't be IN the situation. Yes a man and a woman does have a right to say no, but not all human are perfect and well.... there are scums too in all society, while the person committing the act (rape) the person could have said no or avoid the situation.

 

[Adam]

If you get drunk and misunderstand how to drive a car, you're still 100% guilty!

There are different charges for drinking and driving and hurting someone versus intentionally running someone down. My cousin just killed 2 people last weekend in a drinking and driving-related accident. He's going to jail, but not the same amount as if he had run them down purposefully.[/QUOTE]

And do you think that any of the blame should fall on the people he hit with his car, because they were driving in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or were they driving in a provocative manner?[/QUOTE]

Not worth responding to this kind of stupidity other than to point it out for everyone else to laugh at.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

Lovely Boner: I am not saying the woman CAN'T say no, but it does not absolve her from all "guilt" of the situation. If she said no to begin with she wouldn't be IN the situation. Yes a man and a woman does have a right to say no, but not all human are perfect and well.... there are scums too in all society, while the person committing the act (rape) the person could have said no or avoid the situation.

If the woman never says no, then there isn't a rape at all! If she says no, she's not guilty if someone forces her to have sex afterwards. 0%. No matter what.

adammon - There is no such thing as rapeslaughter since it's COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE to accidentally rape someone!

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

Adammon, I was hoping you'd just say "yes"

 

[GasBandit]

adammon - There is no such thing as rapeslaughter since it's COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE to accidentally rape someone!

Well, it is IMPROBABLE... and would require some highly coincidental breaking of floors and ceilings, or maybe a bannister.

 

[Troll]

If you get drunk and misunderstand how to drive a car, you're still 100% guilty!

There are different charges for drinking and driving and hurting someone versus intentionally running someone down. My cousin just killed 2 people last weekend in a drinking and driving-related accident. He's going to jail, but not the same amount as if he had run them down purposefully.[/QUOTE]

And do you think that any of the blame should fall on the people he hit with his car, because they were driving in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or were they driving in a provocative manner?[/QUOTE]

Not worth responding to this kind of stupidity other than to point it out for everyone else to laugh at.[/QUOTE]

Well I was trying to point out how stupid comparing drunk driving and rape is, but apparently that concept is too complex for you. I'll just say it directly then: I can't think of another violent crime where the victims are routinely blamed. When someone is mugged, people don't say that he/she should not have been out that night or walking in that area. They say that mugging is a crime, and no one should be mugged regardless of where they go. When someone is assaulted, say in a domestic abuse case, people don't tell the victim that it's their fault for marrying the wrong man/woman. When someone is gunned down at work by an angry coworker, no one blames the victim saying they should have been nicer or not show up to work. Yet women get blamed for being raped all the time, and I find that both disgusting and outrageous. No matter what someone does, how they dress, or who they invite over for drinks, they should not be raped. It's not their fault at all.

Oh, and as for the retarded strawman "But what if she was drunk that night, and they next say she calls the police because she didn't mean to have sex!" scenario people are tossing about, that's not the point. That is such a rare case it's not worth discussing. Regret is not the same thing as rape, and people know that.

How's that Adammon? Easier to understand?

 

[Adam]

Oh, and as for the retarded strawman "But what if she was drunk that night, and they next say she calls the police because she didn't mean to have sex!" scenario people are tossing about, that's not the point.

It is the point of the article we're discussing. I guess I was smart enough to catch that while you were writing stupid analogies.

 

[Chibibar]

Oh, and as for the retarded strawman "But what if she was drunk that night, and they next say she calls the police because she didn't mean to have sex!" scenario people are tossing about, that's not the point.

It is the point of the article we're discussing. I guess I was smart enough to catch that while you were writing stupid analogies.[/QUOTE]

I have to agree with Adammon. that is the whole point of the article. People put themselves into these situation (getting drunk) and may end up in rape situation (too drunk to say no, no inhibition, etc etc really wanted it while drunk, but regret in the morning) that is where the partial blame lies. Why get yourself drunk to that level and go home with someone else? why not have a designated driver? why not ensure you get home safely? etc etc.

 

[Chazwozel]

Lovely Boner: I am not saying the woman CAN'T say no, but it does not absolve her from all "guilt" of the situation. If she said no to begin with she wouldn't be IN the situation. Yes a man and a woman does have a right to say no, but not all human are perfect and well.... there are scums too in all society, while the person committing the act (rape) the person could have said no or avoid the situation.

If the woman never says no, then there isn't a rape at all! If she says no, she's not guilty if someone forces her to have sex afterwards. 0%. No matter what.

adammon - There is no such thing as rapeslaughter since it's COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE to accidentally rape someone![/QUOTE]


Whoops my dick slipped into your vag. Mind if I take a few pumps?

 

[@Li3n]

People, rapists are not crocodiles, sure, you might call them stupid, but saying they're partly responsible is retarded. Unless you think all men are rapists, then i could see it...

They say a misogynist is someone who holds the same opinion of women that other women do...

Who are "they"? Misogynists?[/QUOTE]

You know, "They". "THEY". "They" are always saying stuff. It's just what "they" do. But seriously, this is gonna be a fun topic I'm sure. Can't wait to lock this one up. :sneaky:[/QUOTE]
Hehe, Yeah, I'll be keeping an eye on it for funsies. I should have used a smiley to show I was being silly. I tend to seem overly serious with my House avatar.[/QUOTE]

In this case THEY would be one H.L. Mencken... he's got a bunch of good ones.

 

[Norris]

Oh, and as for the retarded strawman "But what if she was drunk that night, and they next say she calls the police because she didn't mean to have sex!" scenario people are tossing about, that's not the point.

It is the point of the article we're discussing. I guess I was smart enough to catch that while you were writing stupid analogies.[/QUOTE]Actually, no its not. The only drunkenness mentioned int the article is about whether or not the respondents to the poll had ever been so drunk they didn't remember what happened the night before.

And the fact that she's drunk doesn't make it ok to rape her. "Harble warble *vomits* Woooo!" doesn't mean she gave INFORMED consent. Additionally: if you convince a drunk girl that you are Brad Pitt, have sex with her, and she wakes up to find you're not - thats rape too. People have to KNOW exactly what they are consenting in order to consent.