Stop Crying Rape

[Lil Red]

Posted without commentary:

http://totalsororitymove.com/stop-crying-rape

 

So we went to the pre-games and we went to the bars and we went to the frat parties. We did drink to our heart’s content and we made bad decisions. We did go home with strangers. And then we woke up and we decided that we didn’t like what we had done. We regretted it. We didn’t like that we had willingly taken eleven shots of cheap vodka at the pre-game with “our girls.” We didn’t like that we had arrived at the bar and purchased our own double vodka cranberries. We didn’t like that we had accepted a shot from our best friend and then another from our biology lab partner. We didn’t like that we had drunkenly danced on the counter and we were embarrassed that a bar full of strangers had likely seen our panties. We didn’t like that we were blacked out, and we most certainly did not like that we had stumbled back to campus after last call to attend a party. We didn’t like that we had fallen down the stairs at a fraternity house, and we didn’t like that we had bullied a brother into giving us vodka, because we “don’t drink beer.” We didn’t like that we had wandered into the bed of someone who was even more intoxicated than we were, and we didn’t like the fact that we woke up wearing nothing but a dirty rush t-shirt. And so we freaked out.

 

Faced with our poor decisions of the night before, we had no excuse but to take them all back. After all, that’s what all of the flyers and the seminars and the PSAs said. That’s what our professors told us, as did the nurses at Student Health. That’s what the protestors wearing the skimpy outfits and holding the glittery posters said. “It’s not your fault,” they all told us. Yes, you were drunk. And yes, you flirted with him. And yes, you initiated the first makeout…and the second one. Yes, you whispered, “Let’s get out of here.” But you felt guilty this morning. And so you take it all back. No matter that he was drunk, too, and you were a willing participant — you take it back. And in the game of your word against his, you will always win.

 

Legally speaking, those who are incapacitated cannot consent to sex. But what is incapacitated? Is it a certain BAC? A slurred word? Perhaps a drunken stumble or a sloppy text? If incapacitation is the end all, be all, then why don’t we have police officers standing outside of bars? Girls exit on one side, boys on the other. Keep your hands to yourselves and where I can see them. No more one-night stands, no more walks of shame. So what is it? What’s the line that can’t be crossed? And what about the boys? What if they’re drunk, too?

 

We’ve created a culture where it is completely acceptable for girls to get drunk, make bad decisions, and then take it all back. There is no ownership, no responsibility, no acceptance of one’s own mistakes. And for what? So we can feel better about our actions? So we can feel better about our “numbers” which don’t mean anything, anyway? So we can feel better about the poor choices, the stupid decisions, the regrets, the “I shouldn’t haves,” the errors, the misjudgments, the shots, the kisses, and the sex? I just…I don’t understand.

 

This culture that we now live in, this societal acceptance of regret and unaccountability — it’s wrong. We’re creating a mockery of the real victims of sexual assault, the ones who are violently attacked. The ones who didn’t willingly take the shot, drink the drink, and climb into bed. We’re discouraging them from stepping forward. We’re preventing police officers from taking them seriously and district attorneys from pressing charges. We’re creating a world where all females are victims and all men are attackers — and that is simply not the case. Perhaps there is a gray area. Maybe something does, in fact, exist between the spectrum of rape and a consensual one-night-stand. But that doesn’t mean that every drunken hookup is the result of a violent attack. That doesn’t mean that women can go into a situation knowing good and well what will happen, and then take it back when the sun comes up. It simply doesn’t work like that. Something has got to give.

 

We’re supposed to be living in a world where women can be anything they want to be. Isn’t that what we were taught? That we’re strong and independent and able-bodied? That we can be the mommy, the veterinarian, and maybe even the president? That we can not only preach girl power, but live it, too? That we don’t have to be ashamed of our sexuality or forced to hide it? That we can play with the big boys and act like them, too? So why are we running from it? Why are we going out and making stupid decisions and then acting like we are in no way responsible for ourselves? That’s not how it works. We don’t get to arbitrarily take things back. We don’t get to be stupid and then blameless. We don’t get to be held unaccountable for our actions. Doing so sets us back. Doing so makes us weak and it makes us powerless. It’s time that we stop playing the blame game. It’s time that we start taking responsibility for our own actions — no matter how bad they may be.

Edited January 16, 2014 by Lil Red

[PhuturePriest]

This reminds me of a scandal that happened a little while ago in the media. A video of a drunk girl and a drunk guy having sex after partying one night went viral, and the girl then charged the guy in court with rape. Unfortunately for her, the jury watched the video, and they all agreed they were both quite clearly drunk, and that they were both positively receptive of each other, and that there was no struggle going on in the video.

[CrossCuT]

BG and I were having a private discussion about Slut walks recently. 

[beatitude]

This is disgusting and makes me feel ill.

 

Where are the articles saying "Stop crying theft!" about how people need to take responsibility for their 'bad choices' in leaving their house unlocked for half an hour while they had a nap? The fact that someone is drunk is not an invitation to rape them, and trying to make out that issues of consent and capacity are just too blurry and difficult to understand is a cheap trick - any decent guy is perfectly capable of ascertaining whether his partner is willing or not, and pretending that it's oh so difficult is just a way to get rapists off the hook. Let's also not lose sight of the fact that most rapes aren't carried out by strangers, but by people known to the victim - people the victim is likely to trust. If you let your hair down with friends at a party, then you expect those friends not to hurt you. Men are not censured for wanting to have a good time and daring to hope that they won't be hurt in the process - it's only women who have to 'take responsibility' for having the temerity to hope that they can drink at a party and not be molested.

 

The majority of rapes aren't even reported, because it has a notoriously low conviction rate and there is already enough shame and terror attached even without the knowledge that your skirt length/level of intoxication/profession/sexual history/sock colour are likely to be scrutinised to check if you are worthy of being believed - or if you're even 'rapeable'. If you're a rape victim and you want to be believed, better hope that you're a straight-A student whose skirts never fall above the knee, who has never touched alcohol, and is preferably a virgin. The real problem is that victims don't feel able to come forward, not that women are 'crying rape' as an excuse to cover up 'bad choices'.

 

I am teetotal and I've never been drunk in my entire life, but should that change and should I get drunk at a party only to wake up with half my clothes missing, as in the scenario this author describes - then yes, I will report a rape. Because the fact that many people feel that intoxication makes a woman fair game ("Hey, she was asking for it...") is a far worse 'choice' than a woman's decision to get drunk. Unlike being drunk, rape is a crime and it deserves to be punished as a crime.

Edited January 16, 2014 by beatitude

[PhuturePriest]

This is disgusting and makes me feel ill.

 

Where are the articles saying "Stop crying theft!" about how people need to take responsibility for their 'bad choices' in leaving their house unlocked for half an hour while they had a nap? The fact that someone is drunk is not an invitation to rape them, and trying to make out that issues of consent and capacity are just too blurry and difficult to understand is a cheap trick - any decent guy is perfectly capable of ascertaining whether his partner is willing or not, and pretending that it's oh so difficult is just a way to get rapists off the hook. Let's also not lose sight of the fact that most rapes aren't carried out by strangers, but by people known to the victim - people the victim is likely to trust. If you let your hair down with friends at a party, then you expect those friends not to hurt you. Men are not censured for wanting to have a good time and daring to hope that they won't be hurt in the process - it's only women who have to 'take responsibility' for having the temerity to hope that they can drink at a party and not be molested.

 

The majority of rapes aren't even reported, because it has a notoriously low conviction rate and there is already enough shame and terror attached even without the knowledge that your skirt length/level of intoxication/profession/sexual history/sock colour are likely to be scrutinised to check if you are worthy of being believed - or if you're even 'rapeable'. If you're a rape victim and you want to be believed, better hope that you're a straight-A student whose skirts never fall above the knee, who has never touched alcohol, and is preferably a virgin. The real problem is that victims don't feel able to come forward, not that women are 'crying rape' as an excuse to cover up 'bad choices'.

 

I am teetotal and I've never been drunk in my entire life, but should that change and should I get drunk at a party only to wake up with half my clothes missing, as in the scenario this author describes - then yes, I will report a rape. Because the fact that many people feel that intoxication makes a woman fair game ("Hey, she was asking for it...") is a far worse 'choice' than a woman's decision to get drunk. Unlike being drunk, rape is a crime and it deserves to be punished as a crime.

 

If both of you are drunk, and both of you consent to it in your drunken state, then it's not rape. People say "You can't consent if you're drunk." Well, they're right. But if the other guy is just as drunk as you are, doesn't that mean he didn't consent to it, either?

[God the Father]

 

Where are the articles saying "Stop crying theft!" about how people need to take responsibility for their 'bad choices' in leaving their house unlocked for half an hour while they had a nap?

 

"Victim-blaming" is rampant when it comes to vandalism and theft.

 

for instance:

 

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/12/19/police-warn-homeowners-to-avoid-christmas-crime/

 

less explicitly:

 

http://riskmanagement.nd.edu/international-travel/international-travel/safety/do-and-don-t-do-while-travelling/

 

Meanwhile a loved one recently had her purse stolen, with a laptop and cash inside. Everyone she came forward to, including the police and her supervisors (work documents were inside the stolen item) chastised her for leaving the item unattended for five minutes, and made no concerted effort to identify and prosecute the criminal.

 

Consider that too anecdotal if you want, but your double standard doesn't really exist.

[Golden Years]

By this argument, then a man going to a bar and getting drunk and getting into a fight and getting killed "deserved" it because maybe he looked mean or dangerous or like he was about to attack someone, and he provoked the killer who after all was drinking too and couldn't help himself.  No.  Murder is murder and rape is rape. 

 

On the other hand, we need to look at the world we live in and think of ways we can change it.  We are constantly bombarded with images from the entertainment business glorifying casual sex, the clothing industry which only sells clingy and revealing garments to young women, and the general lack of modesty and chastity in society.  Girls are taught that they are competing with other women for available men, that men are only interested in one thing, and that in order to get his attention you have to be flirty and available, or at least give that impression.  Both sexes grow up learning that sex before marriage or even outside of a committed long term relationship is a social norm and nothing to think twice about.  So you mix that with a culture of heavy drinking among young people, along with a complete ignorance on the part of many young women about the male sex drive, and it shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that these tragic events take place.

 

Perhaps the answer is that sentences for convicted rapists in such situations should be less than for a complete stranger who had stalked someone in her home, someone she'd never met and certainly hadn't gone drinking with.  I'm sure that judges take such things into account during sentencing. 

 

But the fact remains, murder is murder and rape is rape.

[Lilllabettt]

Where are the articles saying "Stop crying theft!" about how people need to take responsibility for their 'bad choices' in leaving their house unlocked for half an hour while they had a nap?

 

 

A better analogy to what is being discussed in the article is a woman getting drunk, in her drunken state giving away her iphone 5c to another drunk friend, and then waking up the next day and calling the cops to report that she's been robbed. 

 

When people are drunk they make decisions they regret. They decide to say things they shouldn't, they decide to drive when they shouldn't, they sleep with people they shouldn't. All of those bad decisions have consequences.

 

If a man is drunk and a woman (drunk or not) tells him "no" --- but because alcohol has screwed up his judgment he decides to keep going anyway ---he is nevertheless responsible for his decision. We would call him a rapist.

 

Right?

 

Why does this logic not apply to women who decide, while drunk, to say "yes" to a man?

[beatitude]

Theft isn't a perfect analogy, because a human body isn't the same thing as a wallet or another piece of property - we're talking about a violation of an actual person that could have far-reaching and painful consequences for their future life. The existence of the double standard is exemplified pretty well nor only by the poor reporting and conviction rate, but by the sheer frequency with which this discussion about 'responsible' female behaviour occurs (it outstrips discussions on theft by miles) and the reactions when a conviction is actually achieved. In the Steubenville rape case, so much of the press coverage was dedicated to how young men's lives and promising careers can be ruined so easily - I remember watching aghast and wondering when the life of the victim was going to get a mention.

 

The double standard is also obvious in the way people talk about rape. Take FuturePriest's example. He wants to talk about hypotheticals where the guy and the girl are both drunk - in a thread that attributes full blame to the woman for not 'taking responsibility' for her drinking. We will never see a thread on Phatmass about men needing to 'take responsibility' for their drinking in case they force themselves on someone unwilling. That's the difference.

 

And FP, men can rape when drunk because alcohol does not automatically wipe out all control and all knowledge of what you are doing. It is possible to have consensual sex when drunk; it is not possible to have consensual sex when you are incapacitated. This is a very clear distinction.

[Golden Years]

Maybe the moral of this story is everyone needs to stop consuming so much alcohol.  There's a reason liquor has traditionally been called "spirits" and trust me they're not the good kind. 

[arfink]

I think the more important moral of the story should be "Don't get drunk, mmkay?"

[PhuturePriest]

Theft isn't a perfect analogy, because a human body isn't the same thing as a wallet or another piece of property - we're talking about a violation of an actual person that could have far-reaching and painful consequences for their future life. The existence of the double standard is exemplified pretty well nor only by the poor reporting and conviction rate, but by the sheer frequency with which this discussion about 'responsible' female behaviour occurs (it outstrips discussions on theft by miles) and the reactions when a conviction is actually achieved. In the Steubenville rape case, so much of the press coverage was dedicated to how young men's lives and promising careers can be ruined so easily - I remember watching aghast and wondering when the life of the victim was going to get a mention.

 

The double standard is also obvious in the way people talk about rape. Take FuturePriest's example. He wants to talk about hypotheticals where the guy and the girl are both drunk - in a thread that attributes full blame to the woman for not 'taking responsibility' for her drinking. We will never see a thread on Phatmass about men needing to 'take responsibility' for their drinking in case they force themselves on someone unwilling. That's the difference.

 

And FP, men can rape when drunk because alcohol does not automatically wipe out all control and all knowledge of what you are doing. It is possible to have consensual sex when drunk; it is not possible to have consensual sex when you are incapacitated. This is a very clear distinction.

 

I bolded the important part in your last paragraph. No one has mentioned (To my knowledge) incapacitation other than you. We have all thus far been talking about simply being drunk. Alcohol does not automatically wipe out all control and all knowledge of what you are doing, so that means that if two drunk people freely have sex, it's not rape. This is the situation we have been talking about. No one has mentioned incapacitation.

[beatitude]

I bolded the important part in your last paragraph. No one has mentioned (To my knowledge) incapacitation other than you. We have all thus far been talking about simply being drunk. Alcohol does not automatically wipe out all control and all knowledge of what you are doing, so that means that if two drunk people freely have sex, it's not rape. This is the situation we have been talking about. No one has mentioned incapacitation.

 

FP, the article LilRed quoted mentions incapacity:

 

Legally speaking, those who are incapacitated cannot consent to sex. But what is incapacitated? Is it a certain BAC? A slurred word? Perhaps a drunken stumble or a sloppy text?

 

 

The claims that incapacity is too vague a concept to understand don't fly. Trying to make it vague is just a way to get rapists off the hook.

 

Lillabett, the conviction rate on rape is so low and the scepticism surrounding rape is so high that 'Why doesn't this logic apply to women who say yes when drunk?' isn't the question. A far harsher logic than the one you propose is already applied to rape victims, drunk or not. The problem with discussions like this one is that they make out that false allegations are this huge phenomenon when they are not. They're barely a footnote. Unreported rape is a huge phenomenon, as is a tendency to judge the victims in extremely harsh terms. We do not have women flooding police stations attempting to claim that choices they regret constitute rape, and suggesting that this is so does a disservice to the very large number of women who have been raped and are afraid to report.

 

If I gave a valuable phone to a friend when drunk, I would expect them not to take it. Most of my friends who drink seem capable of watching out for one another if they're inebriated enough to do stupid things. If they did take the phone, then they would be taking obvious advantage. Rape is far worse than that. A body isn't a phone, and taking advantage of someone who is in no condition to give consent isn't simply a harmless misunderstanding on a funny evening out, when everyone gets drunk and someone thinks it's a fine idea to bring home traffic cones and shopping trolleys. Again, the issue isn't that there are all these women saying 'yes' and then retracting it - this is a hypothetical that deflects attention from the actual problem, which is the fact that there are many people (including those in the judiciary) who believe that rape is never rape unless you fit the profile of the 'perfect victim'. Discussions like this one only reinforce the image of that 'perfect victim'.

Edited January 16, 2014 by beatitude

[Basilisa Marie]

This makes me so mad I could spit. 

 

The idea that there all are these women out there trying to ruin the lives of men with false cries of rape is a disgusting myth perpetrated by people who have bought into the delusion that women are the sole arbiters of whether or not sex is happening and that men are nothing more that lust-crazed animals. 

 

Women who are actually raped and have the courage to bring their case to trial are almost always painted as conniving sluts who are just experiencing morning-after remorse.  The fact is that a raped woman is treated this way by the courts means that a false cry of rape is incredibly likely to fall through anyway. So what's the point of bringing this up at all? All it does is reinforce the idea that real rape victims will not be listened to. 

 

It's a pointless article that perpetuates ideas that do far more harm than good. 

[PhuturePriest]

This makes me so mad I could spit. 

 

The idea that there all are these women out there trying to ruin the lives of men with false cries of rape is a disgusting myth perpetrated by people who have bought into the delusion that women are the sole arbiters of whether or not sex is happening and that men are nothing more that lust-crazed animals. 

 

Women who are actually raped and have the courage to bring their case to trial are almost always painted as conniving silly sallies who are just experiencing morning-after remorse.  The fact is that a raped woman is treated this way by the courts means that a false cry of rape is incredibly likely to fall through anyway. So what's the point of bringing this up at all? All it does is reinforce the idea that real rape victims will not be listened to. 

 

It's a pointless article that perpetuates ideas that do far more harm than good. 

 

I've definitely seen people blame those who were raped for being raped, with such gems as "She was asking for it,", or, "What did she think was going to happen?". It always grinds my gears when I hear people say those things. I think it stems from the fact that people don't like to believe rape is really a thing -- it's just something girls make up because of guilt. The reason they want to believe that is because rape is such an unpleasant thing to think about, so they just pretend it doesn't exist and discredit those who were actually raped. This is of course wrong, but I think that's where it comes from. I just wish that instead of discrediting rape victims so people can feel good and believe rape isn't real, people would just give rape victims the support and love they need.