The atrocity reported in the news story below is beyond words. Sadly, it is typical of many we report on day after day after day. I would like to hear one woman who self-identifies as a feminist condemn the girl's actions. Just one. What is so terribly reprehensible is not just the fact that a girl was willing to sacrifice the lives of three innocent boys to exact revenge against one of them, but that she was able to do it. There is something terribly, terribly wrong with a system that allows this. (Thanks for AfOR for tipping us off about this one.)
Rape girl 'confession' caught on camera
New evidence suggests a girl’s rape testimony, which sent three teenage boys to prison, may have been fabricated
A 16-year-old girl, whose allegation that she was raped at Fredericia train station resulted in the conviction of three teenage boys, unknowingly confessed on a hidden camera that she lied about the incident, according to public broadcaster DR.
The video was taped by one of the boy’s families and is presently being used as evidence in a Western High Court case to have the original convictions overturned. The girl is now being charged by police for fabricating the story.
In the video, the brother of one of the three boys approaches the girl and chats with her on a sofa. The video shows the girl flirting with the boy while he tries to draw the true explanation out of her of what actually happened at the station.
At one point while being filmed, the girl says she was not held down by two of the boys while the other raped her, as she testified in court. She added that the sex she had with the one boy was consensual.
The girl also said in the video that she made the accusations because she was angry at one of the boys. She added that it was unfortunate the two others were sentenced in the case, but said she couldn’t find any other way to get back at the one boy.
During the filming she said she would not recant her testimony for fear of being punished or ending up in a youth offender institution.
Link: http://www.cphpost.dk/component/content/48436.html?task=view
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
72 comments:
Can any of our readers think of how we can obtain more information about this case -- what happened at the trial, etc?
"She added that it was unfortunate the two others were sentenced in the case, but said she couldn’t find any other way to get back at the one boy."
This language reminds me of that vile pig you quoted - who recommended genital mutilations for convicted rapists - and said it would be "unfortunate" that this would inevitably happen to innocent men as well.
Right, Snark. I want this girl to go to prison for life. Seriously. Send a message. This is so terribly vile. But I wouldn't be surprised if these three boys remain in prison for the remainder of their terms and nothing happens to her.
Mothers, father, don't you care what is being done to your sons??? Seriously. Do you really think the victimization of your daughters is more worthy of your attention than the victimizaiton of your sons? Y'all need to wake up. It wasn't your son in this case, but if you read this blog on a daily basis you will see case after case after case where this occurs. And next time, it COULD be your son.
"But I wouldn't be surprised if these three boys remain in prison for the remainder of their terms and nothing happens to her."
But there's video evidence of her recanting - surely they won't remain in prison?
"During the filming she said she would not recant her testimony for fear of being punished or ending up in a youth offender institution."
How can we make them fear being punishmed more is the main question here.
Can we say if your lie is exposed early then punishment would be minimal,but if your lie is exposed much latter,prepare for some serious consequnces and double the jailtime the man had to sit away?
"But there's video evidence of her recanting - surely they won't remain in prison?"
In the US, and I am sure the UK, evidence acquired after the conviction is subject to a stricter scrutiny. Hell, even after the New York woman who found religion recanted, it was questionable if the innocent man would be released. And it took forever. All the while, the innocent man suggested he was subject to prison atrocities.
Can any of our readers think of how we can obtain more information about this case -- what happened at the trial, etc?
I have friends living near there, I will get in touch with them.
Thanks, Mary.
I am a feminist and I absolutely condemn the actions of false accusers. Being a feminist only means you believe and advocate for equal rights. It does not mean you advocate for one gender over another. Please don't paint all feminists with the same label. Intolerance is never okay. I also agree that false accusers should face much stronger penalties. I am currently working on a campaign to advocate for such changes in the law.
Good, Sherry. And thank you for writing.
We, too, believe in gender equality. We advocate for women who are falsely accused of statutory rape with the same vigor we advocate for presumed innocent men and boys who are accused. Unfortunately, when it comes to rape issues, the public discourse is dominated by a nasty strain of feminism that couldn't care less about the falsely accused. These people, who are mostly women, are neither typical of women in general nor of the women and men who seek gender equity (and that latter group would pretty much include every reader of this blog, I would bet).
The perversion now rests solidly on a perverted law enforcement community that has fostered and enable a culture of false rape accusations.
Its time for a civil rights lawsuit to separate gender feminism and our legal system.
When the legal system stops protecting the innocent, is when the innocent stop protecting the legal system.
scott
The legal system could have sniffed out her lies in the first place, But now that there is a perversion in the legal community, they no longer question whether she is lying, and in effect..."NO LONGER PROTECT THE INNOCENT".
Sherry said:
"I am currently working on a campaign to advocate for such changes in the law."
Good luck. You will face hostile opposition from law enforcement and from most of your "feminist sisters". Feminism in general doesn't believe in the existence of false rape.
Sherry, tell us what we can to help. Thanks.
FRS, do you have the means to lobby and help change the laws?
Blog´ging is not enough, something has to be done.
So, it is not an alibi this time, but the desire for revenge.
There's nowhere an innocent man can run or hide from this stuff, only things one can do to make it less likely of being falsely accused.
Reading this material makes me tired and depressed some days, as I wait for my own falsely accused nightmare to end. One doesn't really completely understand what injustice is and what the followers of those like Mandela, King, and Gandhi were facing until one reads enough of these news articles and stories. It's funny this story comes out of Denmark because, like Hamlet, I don't know which is better for me: to fight; to sequester or exile myself; or to find oblivion. For now, I'll use my keyboard to fight until I am either released from suspicion or a delusional liar is able to take away my reputation and freedom. At least in this moment I still have choices, but for how long?
Let's hope these young men are released and they find some peace in this life.
@Aaron 11:54 AM:
I wrote a 3-part post back in January that outlines some of the things that could be done:
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2010/01/how-can-i-light-fire-under-you.html
Unfortunately, there's nothing I am willing to do to take action on these suggestions until my case is either dropped, no-billed, or I go to trial. If it's of the first two, then I can share my story with Archivist and begin taking action. If it's a trial, then I may need the help of everyone here. Until then, my suggestions stand.
"It would help to have the support of the media, even if it is alternative news media, to get the story out there. Any recommendations as to who those media types would be?
My own thoughts:
Alex Jones
http://www.infowars.com/
Alex is a consipracy theorist, but we here at FRS are conspiracy factualists, so it might be a good fit.
George Noory
http://www.coasttocoastam.com
Coast to Coast has a wide variety of non-mainstream news topics and usually cover news that becomes mainstream years later. George would do a great job covering this issue if we could find a speaker to talk with him on the issue.
PBS's Frontline
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/
Frontline would cover this issue fairly and in depth if we could convince them to do it.
Michael Moore
http://michaelmoore.com/
Maybe he could make a movie to follow up "Sicko" -- "Rapo" ??
Spike Lee
http://www.40acres.com/
This subject would strike home with so many in the African American community, and Spike has already done work on Kobe Bryant. The things we falsely accused have been through would make for a riveting movie script or documentary.
It would be great if Pierce or others from this site, could get on to one of these shows and talk about these issues or approach those documentary/movie makers with the idea. Maybe it could be worked into a group project as a letter writing campaign. I could easily see this issue turned into an investigative documentary on Frontline! "
Other media types to approach would include:
Bill O'Reilly and Tucker Carlson
who have both had their run-ins with sexual harassment issues and outright false accusations.
Ultimately, one must ask how things got to this point. Just like Deep Throat's injunction in Watergate scandal, we need to "follow the money." Moral panic and hysteria are great money makers and the institutions that are founded on moral panic and hysteria will seek out and destroy any target that interferes with their existence and funding. This fact may keep me from bringing my story forward as I have no desire to bring more suffering into my life than already exists, but it will not keep me from encouraging others to do so and to support in any way I can, those who seek equal protection and restoration of our Constitutional rights as guaranteed by the 6th and 14th Amendments (among others). I believe others have pointed out:
http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html
that we are confronting a "misandry bubble" that will foment into a civil rights issue for men in the coming decade(s).
This another case that proves that you should have PHYSICAL PROOF of a rape to even take a case to trial.
Because you see how easy it is to send innocent guys to jail just on someone's word.
When I read stories like this I always wonder how many people are in prison for stuff like this.
And yes Pierce this girl deserves life in prison I agree.
Even as a victim of a false rape accusation myself, i still believe in some degree of mercy for the young girl.
But the perversion that has entered our legal system needs to be put on trial, for police could have sniffed out here lie...
But with the perversion deep in place.."the police must always believe the victim, and NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER use questions that may doubt her story. (which is just a perversion of our system)
"This another case that proves that you should have PHYSICAL PROOF of a rape to even take a case to trial."
I tried to find more information on the original case, but so far, I've got nothing.
I don't even know how Danish law compares to either US or UK laws, so I have no idea of how the convictions were achieved.
Presumably, since she mentions consensual sex herself, there might have DNA evidence, although it is unclear if her claim was made soon after the sex, or quite a bit later - in which case there may have been no physical evidence that sex even occurred.
Hopefully, more information will emerge, and shed some light on just how such a gross injustice could have occurred.
At this point the only thing that seems certain is just how callously young women are when destroying the lives of young men. What could one of them have done to her that would be so bad that she would send all three to prison? I'd have to guess that the offense to her was actually something rather petty. But, as we see so much of in the Western World, the rhetoric of the gender-feminists used in indoctrinating children has been enormously effective in getting the message through to young women that men and boys are valueless and disposable.
------------
In a related vein, I read a comment by a poster going by the name ClarenceComments on MarkMark’s blog, in which he claims:
”Lastly, the behaviour of the young lady herself: she is said to have exited the bathroom hysterically, she immediately called the police and went right into a hospital for tests.”
Seeing as how this seemed like a highly damning bombshell, I tried to search for news sources supporting this claim. But, I can find nothing which gives this detail. I have challenged this ClarenceComments as to his supposed source (comment still awaiting moderation on MM’s blog), but I suspect that it is merely something fabricated (not necessarily by him) to “backfill” the allegation and lend an air of credibility.
I seem to recall that in the early accounts of the Hofstra Hoax, it was reported that Donmell Ndonye had run screaming from the restroom in which she’d had multiple consensual sexual encounters (we learned via the interview with her boyfriend that this did not happen, but rather that he found her outside the restroom, looking as though she’d just had sex with someone (else), and challenged her – ultimately leading to her going to the police to tearfully claim that she’d been raped) . At that time, it made it seem quite likely that she had been raped. Admittedly, I was initially duped, myself.
So, I’d like to also ask, on this forum, if anyone is aware of any legitimate news accounts of Ben Roethlisberger’s accuser running screaming from the restroom.
Mea Culpa; that would be MarkyMark's blog.
slwerner, the Roethlisberger accuser was very upset when she went to the police but nothing I've seen sheds any light on her conduct immediately after the alleged incident. Police are asking for videos, etc. There is a picture of her supposedly with her arms around Ben and smiling prior to the alleged incident. The gender feminists would say that means nothing. Well, I would say that I can show you a thousand cases where the police believed the woman when she made the complaint but it turned out to be false.
Archivist - "the Roethlisberger accuser was very upset when she went to the police but nothing I've seen sheds any light on her conduct immediately after the alleged incident. "
Yes, I found quite a few accounts suggesting that she was "hysterical" at the Police station.
Yet, one would have to assume that if she had run screaming out of a restroom at a club, multiple people would have witnessed it - and, they'd be talking. Thus, the fact that I can find nothing of the sort being reported on leads me to believe that it did not happen.
We know very little about this accuser. As I am want to do, my wild speculations include the possibility that she (like Danmell Ndonye) is also in another relationship, and may have been cheating on her partner with (celebrity alpha-male) Roethlisberger (nothing out of the ordinary there).
But, if someone who knew her boyfriend saw her and Ben emerging from their restroom encounter, she (again like Danmell Ndonye) may well have panicked, came up with the rape claim as cover.
Unlike the account suggested by ClarenceComments, it also seems clear that she did not call the police, but rather went with friends to the police station to make her report - and agreed to go for a SANE exam/treatment at the request the police.
Running screaming from a restroom, and immediately calling police would seem consistent with an actual rape. Going to the police, and giving a tearful account, however, can also be seen as NOT being INCONSISTENT with an FRA.
Too little is known at this point to reach any meaningful conclusions - and I say that as one who DID jump to the conclusion that Danmell Ndonye HAD been raped, based on early news accounts.
slwerner, re: the Hofstra case -- you weren't alone. It was very common to think a rape had occurred, given the news reports that declared, "A RAPE HAS OCCURRED!"
As for Ben, no matter what her demeanor or conduct after-the-fact, some sexual assault counselor will spin it to be consistent with a rape.
The girl that had sex with roethlisbereger has dollar signs in her dreams.
The little pig did not file criminal charges, because there was no criminal activity..she just filed a civil suit for the cash.
Anonymous - ”The girl that had sex with roethlisbereger has dollar signs in her dreams.
The little pig did not file criminal charges, because there was no criminal activity..she just filed a civil suit for the cash.”
I assume by “The girl”, you are referring to the accuser in GA; and by “The little pig”, you are referring to Andrea McNulty, the aging cocktail waitress and frequent hook-up of Roethlisberger’s in Nevada?
If so, definitely YES as to McNulty. Even her friends agree that she hooked up with him frequently, and never once complained about it prior to her filing a civil suit seeking $$$.
As to this new accuser, it’s hard to say. Perhaps, as I mused at the time of McNulty’s accusation, following on the success of Kobe Bryant’s accuser, certain women are “feeling out” the best approaches to getting rich celebs to pay-out (that was also the approximate time that the story of attempt to blackmail Rick Patino, in a similar way, broke).
I believe MarkyMark did a good job of laying out why a guy like Roethlisberger would NOT need to resort to rape. I’d add that following a woman into a public women’s restroom at a nightspot is also not a good choice for man bent on rape. [of course, it’s hardly any secret that there are plenty of restroom hook-ups going on in those places, nor is it unknown by those who frequent such locals that those hook-ups typically have numerous witnesses as people go in and out while the couple continue in their encounter].
It’s also certainly no secret that sports and entertainment celebs have no shortage of women who’d jump at the chance to “jump” on that them – young, old, single, attached, and even married women are in abundant supply for the sexual appetites of such men.
It’s not beyond the realm of possibility that a guy in Roethlisberger, being used to women willingly consenting, even throwing themselves at him; might not have understood that this particular woman had changed her mind, and did not want to have sex with her – and ended up raping her. But, that’s hardly the only explanation.
Two other possibilities that come quickly to mind are that, A) she realized that someone (who she had reason to be concerned WRT their response) observed her, and she (like so many other examples detailed previously on this site) decided to claim to have been raped so as to cover for her illicit consensual acts; or, B) like Kobe Bryant’s accuser, she decided to try to parlay her consensual hook-up into a big pay-off.
We can continue to speculate on the myriad of possibilities here, but, at this point, I don’t believe that we have anywhere near enough information to be able to make any sure judgments. [you can rest assured that the rape-hysteria gender-feminists have already judge him guilty. They seldom feel the need to wait for sound evidence. We, however, can chose to hold ourselves to a higher standard.]
slwerner, aren't you surprised they haven't called for Ben's firing?
One thing I notice is people are assuming that Ben did touch her!
I have learned over the years that he might have only been in the same room as her at best. It's not always a matter of consent.
What I'm saying is look at the Duke case.........no one even TOUCHED her!
She confessed to his BROTHER, while flirting with him? How did she think that was going to turn out OK for her?
I'm a feminist and I condemn this girl's actions.
Anon at 7:25: Thank you.
Obviously there are NO protections built into the systems that are anything but a total sham. This case never should have made it out of district court -- and it couldn't have without the enablement of an incompetent judge and a ruthless prosecutor. False convictions don't happen by accident. First the criminal has to file a false report, then the prosecutor has to proceed with zero evidence, then a judge has to enable it, and then twelve people have to make a mockery out of their oath to give the defendents the benefit of the doubt.
Proof beyond a resonable doubt obviously didn't exist in this case, so just how in the hell did three boys get convicted based on nothing but the word of a worthless liar? If it were up to me everyone responsible for this would be held accountable.
Archivist: about Ben, let's remember that this latest accusation isn't rape. It's sexual assault. So far as I know there has been no allegation of sexual penetration.
Falsifying a rape is not a right. It is wrong.
Stop False Rape.
Falsifying a rape is not a right. It is wrong.
Stop False Rape.
Just checked back on the Copenhagen Post story to see if there were any updates/new links to related items.
Nada. And still just the one comment, although it's a good one.
I'm not sure what to make of the non-buzz this story seems to be getting. One would think that news of three young men being falsely imprisoned would have many up in arms, calling out for justice to be done.
But, it looks more like a collective snore from the Danes. I keep hearing about what wimp-assed manginas Scandinavians have become. Perhaps they've just become such pussy-whipped female-pedestalizing gender-feminist-indoctrinated fools that they really cannot bring themselves to find any concern what so ever for their boys.
Sad.
Sick, isn't it, slwerner? The worst thing that can happen, whether in Europe or here, is to allow this out-of-control political correctness to trample the rights of the presumed innocent without protest from persons of good will. "Rape," the symbol of female subjugation as opposed to the actual crime, has been deified. Anything deemed by those who control the public discourse on this issue as inconsistent with that deification is rejected, or treated with indifference. False rape claims are deemed inconsistent with this deification.
"I am a feminist and I absolutely condemn the actions of false accusers. Being a feminist only means you believe and advocate for equal rights. It does not mean you advocate for one gender over another."
Rubbish. Feminism is a female lobby group, pure and simple. Feminism is not the ultimate authority or arbiter on what constitutes fairness or justice in relations between the sexes. Unless someone died and made the sisterhood God.
And even if the odd feminist is genuinely interested in dealing with the problems of false accusations, it doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of feminists either couldn't care less or are positively happy about the number of innocent men and boys affected. The odd decent human being does not change the fact that a particular movement is generally corrupt and destructive.
I am quite skeptical about your claim that you are involved in a campaign to bring tougher penalties for false accusers. I suspect you are merely adopting the role of 'concern troll'. It is hard to imagine anyone being a card-carrying member of NOW or similar organizations and simultaneously involved in such a cause. It must be awkward when your feminist friends ask you what you have been up to!
Nick
I agree.
Feminism is the hatred of men plain and simple.
I would be that 99% of all feminists either do not care at all about FRA and the destruction that they cause men or they are just tickled pink that they happen and would like to see more of them.
In sweden you might as well just have a sex change if you are a guy because it's the only way you will have any rights,
Did you know that in sweden that prostitution is only a crime FOR THE MAN!!
Meaning that if you get caught with a call girl she commits no crime and you as the buyer goes to jail.
Why anyone who is a male lives there is beyond me.
"I am a feminist and I absolutely condemn the actions of false accusers. Being a feminist only means you believe and advocate for equal rights. It does not mean you advocate for one gender over another."
That's what it's supposed to mean. Usually that's not the way it works, though.
Feminism binds it's own feet.
Feminism doesn't seem to be able to get inside the notion that empowerment can only come from within oneself. It always argues from a position of weakness and demands that fairness requires compenastion or accommodation in some form. Empowerment cannot be simply "given". It must be earned, or probably more correctly learned. A big part of it requires taking ownership of one's actions.
Any act by men of "bestowing" compensatory empowerment upon women actually serves to maintain a dynamic of disempowerment for women. It says to women that empowerment can only come from men. Validation can only come from men.
I really do believe that the movement of the sixties and seventies at least had an inkling of these things else we wouldn't have seen the negative view it held of patronisation nor would we have heard the chants of "I am woman, hear me roar". Arguably the modern "you go gyrl" thing is analogous but it strikes me more as an expression of license than of empowerment.
I've come to view feminism as being a creation of the the extremist rump left behind when the huge groundswell support had moved on satisfied that the really important stuff was done. Serves us right for not cleaning up before we left. The toxic waste we left behind has mutated.
Sherry said...
Being a feminist only means you believe and advocate for equal rights. It does not mean you advocate for one gender over another.
Womens' liberation - second wave feminism if you must - advocated equal rights. Feminism never has. I challenge anybody to cite an example of feminism - post 1980 - actually seeking equal treatment of the genders. It just doesn't happen. The typical refrain has been the demand for special treatment - the "womens' tee" to which Pierce frequently refers - to balance the scales, to equalise outcomes as distinct from opportunities or even to somehow make amends for claimed past injustices. Feminism also tends to monopolise what are actually non gendered issues and runs closed shops where it does have control. It actually functions very much the way it claims the "patriarchy" behaved.
Feminism may try to don the mantle of the womens lib movement but in terms of equality it's a pale, shallow imitation.
Think about the labels you adopt. There may be others more apt.
Something to consider going into the future, and a lesson from the Haiti disaster. It is now deemed OK for peak global organisations to overtly discriminate on the basis of gender. It was men...this time.
The reason false accusers are able to get away with their crimes is because of a Supreme Court decision in about the year 1820.
It goes about like this: a falsely accused defendant has no recourse against the plaintiff, unless the defendant suffers more than the ordinary in the course of these matters, for to allow such would tend to deny a poor man his day in court.
This prevents any legal retaliation for malicious prosecutions because it effectively indemnifies the prosecuting attorney in criminal cases and the plaintiff in civil cases.
The lawyers and government officials will never change this ruling because it is what gives them their license to wreck their betters and take unlimited funds under the color of law.
"This another case that proves that you should have PHYSICAL PROOF of a rape to even take a case to trial.
Because you see how easy it is to send innocent guys to jail just on someone's word."
That was my reaction as well.
"I believe MarkyMark did a good job of laying out why a guy like Roethlisberger would NOT need to resort to rape."
While in no way am I suggesting that Roethlisberger is guilty, the problem with MarkyMark's explanation is that he seems to have bought into the largely feminist idea that rape is about getting sex. It isn't. Actual rape is about hurting people, and being able to get sex would not satisfy that "need".
"You will face hostile opposition from law enforcement and from most of your "feminist sisters"."
While I agree that hostility from certain feminists is most plausible, I don't see why law enforcement would oppose changes that help prosecute false accusers.
"But with the perversion deep in place..the police must always believe the victim, and NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER use questions that may doubt her story. (which is just a perversion of our system)"
Except most of the hundreds of false rape accusations on this site are examples demonstrating the exact opposite.
"You will face hostile opposition from law enforcement and from most of your "feminist sisters"."
While I agree that hostility from certain feminists is most plausible, I don't see why law enforcement would oppose changes that help prosecute false accusers.
"But with the perversion deep in place..the police must always believe the victim, and NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER use questions that may doubt her story. (which is just a perversion of our system)"
Except most of the hundreds of false rape accusations on this site are examples demonstrating the exact opposite.
"I don't see why law enforcement would oppose changes that help prosecute false accusers."
Law enforcement does not support any laws against false rape. The belief is that these laws will discourage real rape victims from coming forward.
"Law enforcement does not support any laws against false rape. The belief is that these laws will discourage real rape victims from coming forward."
Do you have any evidence of this? Is this something some law enforcement spokesperson, police fraternal organization, or union official said somewhere?
Anonymous - ”... he seems to have bought into the largely feminist idea that rape is about getting sex. It isn't. Actual rape is about hurting people”
Are you sure you haven't gotten this mixed around. A quick check of feminist rape awareness site gives the opposite of what you are saying. For example:
Rape is not about sex to the rapist; it has to do with control and power.
Perhaps, based on any given situation, gender-feminists will try to have it both ways. It's jkust that I'm used to gender-feminists proclaiming that rape ISN"T about sex, but rather over-powering and dominating the victim.
Anyway, the only way I can imagine Ben Roethlisberger having "raped" this women was in a over-zealous pursuit of sex - against her wishes at the moment that it happened. Ben may just not be used to women saying "no", and didn't beleive that she meant "no". But, that's just speculation on one possible explaination.
Since I'm lazy, I'm just going to cut-n0paste an excerpt from a comment I made at MarkyMarks:
---
As MarkyMark detailed, Roethlisberger isn't the type of guy who needs to pursue women in to public restrooms and force them to have sex. In fact, hooking-up in restrooms in nightclubs really isn't that uncommon these days, and I've personally witnessed an incident of a woman leading a man into the womens restroom.
No man is just going to walk into the womens room (unlike impatient/desperate women who WILL walk right into the mens room) - he gets lead in by the hand. It's the womens way of singling to others that "it's okay, he's with me - wink, wink, nod, nod"
---
Since we are told that the women claims that it happened in a public womens restroom, I beleive it pertainent to think about the likelihood of a man, in a public setting, with lots os people around, charging his way into the ladiesroom in pursuit of his "victim". Personally, I just cannot imagine that most men would do that. I simply beleive that it is far more likely that she invited him in, and likely lead him in by the hand.
Now, once inside she might have changed her mind about having sex. If, in that case, Ben refused to take "no" for an answer, then, the fact is, it was rape - plain and simple.
To understand why this scenario might have been the one that play-out, let me back-track a bit to what might well have lead up to her leading him into the womens restroom.
Now, when a big celeb - a rock star, sports start, a top actor, or other "A-lister" type guy is in a night spot, it is completely normal that women will vie with one another for both his attentions and his sexual attraction. There are many, many women, who, if they had the chance to do so, would be only too eager to have sex with such a man.
From what we are told, Roethlisberger was being polite, willing posing with people (especially women) for pictures. Thus, it seems likely that this particular young women took it upon herself to get and "edge" with herself with Ben so as to (for lack of a better way to put this) "win" him as her prize (over the other women competing for him). Offering sex is often a very effective way for a women to achieve such a goal.
As I can see it happening, she took her chance, suggested that they have sex, lead him to the restroom, and then….
A)had consensual sex, which for whatever reason, she then regretted.
B)changed her mind about having sex, and was raped instead.
C)(as in the recent example) Ben turned her down, and she decided to retaliate.
D)had consensual sex, then realized she might be able to cash-in.
E)…
Who knows how many possibilities there are.
In the end I believe these 3 things: Ben had no need/desire to dominate this woman, he had no need to force her to have sex, and if they ended up in a public women’s restroom, she most likely invited and lead him there.
"Perhaps, based on any given situation, gender-feminists will try to have it both ways."
Yes, and rapists are also political agents of an evil patriarchy. Perhaps one of us could subscribe to their newsletter?
Anyway, even though I've read several books on the subject, trying to analyze feminist rape theories is likely to give both of us a headache.
My point is that from a standpoint of criminology, rapists are violent criminals who are not motivated by a rational gain of getting sex in the same way a thief is motivated by the rational gain of getting money. Studies have shown that rapists often have wives or girlfriends. To put it another way, being able to get sex from the willing doesn't satisfy the desire to force sex upon the unwilling.
"Do you have any evidence of this?"
Yes. Law enforcement believes that rape reports from women are 99.99999999999999999% true. The rest are false. They believe that laws that specifically target false rape will discourage real rape victims from coming forward. This comes from years of influence from various women's groups.
"Is this something some law enforcement spokesperson, police fraternal organization, or union official said somewhere?"
News media interviews.
" Anonymous said...
I'm a feminist and I condemn this girl's actions.
Mar 9, 2010 7:25:00 PM"
With all respect, this is a cop-out and I suspect you know that.
Anyone may condemn the actions of an individual who has been shown up for doing the wrong thing. But that is not the same thing as supporting measures designed to curb such abuses or stop enabling those who abuse the system.
Suppose I hand a madman a loaded gun, and he proceeds to shoot dead several people. I then say 'I condemn this man's actions'. It would be obvious that I am absolving myself of responsibility for facilitating his actions, and simply placing all the responsibility on his shoulders.
Likewise, it is feminists who have given women vastly increased powers to ruin innocent men with false accusations. To simply condemn individual women who are shown to abuse this power, instead of acknowledging that it was a bad idea to give women such power in the first place, is a cop-out.
In any case, I am glad to see feminists trying to cover their butts. It shows we are making progress.
The charge for false rape should be "rape of character" and the punishment equal.
What has a false accuser done? Raped the character/good name of a another person such that their whole life is irrevocably changed, often ruined.
Even if acquitted at trial, the accused will always be treated with suspicion by his community.
""Do you have any evidence of this?"
Yes. Law enforcement believes that rape reports from women are 99.99999999999999999% true."
No, that's not evidence. That just another unsupported statement. It's also false. If you read this site you would see that the majority of false rape accusations were discovered by police.
""Is this something some law enforcement spokesperson, police fraternal organization, or union official said somewhere?"
News media interviews."
Then please show us an example somewhere.
"Even if acquitted at trial, the accused will always be treated with suspicion by his community."
I agree. Considering the amount of harm to the victim, making a false rape accusation should be a felony.
Great comment from Nick S.
Sometimes, the 'apology' is all part of the manipulation.
Likewise, when I see feminists 'condemning' certain actions which would not have happened without feminism's war against men, all I can think is that they are trying to assuage their own barely functioning consciences by extracting themselves from responsibility.
"No, that's not evidence. That just another unsupported statement. It's also false. If you read this site you would see that the majority of false rape accusations were discovered by police."
I'd like you to think about something, why do you think this site exists at all? I guess it shouldn't in your mind. To you, everything is just all neatly cut and dried. There's no injustice. How many of these "false rape accusations were discovered by police" were tried and convicted based on laws specifically written for false rape? None. Why are most false rape accusers never charged with anything and then on top of it retain their anonymity? Police are a part of the problem. It's one thing to discover a false rape accusation, it's another thing to bring that person to justice. I said earlier that law enforcement would rather not press any type of charges against any false rape accuser because they believe it will prevent real rape victims from coming forward. Until that paradigm changes, nothing will change for false rape victims.
"I'd like you to think about something, why do you think this site exists at all? I guess it shouldn't in your mind. To you, everything is just all neatly cut and dried. There's no injustice."
No one here said anything like that.
"How many of these "false rape accusations were discovered by police" were tried and convicted based on laws specifically written for false rape? None. Why are most false rape accusers never charged with anything and then on top of it retain their anonymity? Police are a part of the problem.
It's one thing to discover a false rape accusation, it's another thing to bring that person to justice."
The police don't make the law. When false accusers retain their anonymity, it's due to the press, not the police. It's also generally not the police who decide not to press charges. Their job is discovery and apprehension, not prosecution.
"I said earlier that law enforcement would rather not press any type of charges against any false rape accuser because they believe it will prevent real rape victims from coming forward."
Yes, and the problem here is that you still haven't provided any evidence to support that claim.
Regardless, the police are quite used to people lying to them, and are generally skeptical of anything anyone ever tells them. So the idea that the police believe 99% of rape accusations is absurd. And as cited previously, studies have shown that "the police are prone to say the reason for not believing some rape complainants resides in the fact that the rapes never occurred".
Snark, sometimes you have to read between the lines to really guage the true agenda and manipulation that is going on. That is, look at what is not being said as well as what is.
In any case, she didn't actually apologize for anything. Come to think of it, it is rare to hear a feminist ever concede remorse over the damage feminism has done over anything. Accepting responsibility for one's actions is simply not in the nature of theirs or many other group belief systems.
As the old saying goes, the Mafia always send flowers to the funeral. Feminists are good at shedding crocodile tears over problems they created while pretending they had nothing to do with it.
You're certainly more than welcome to provide any evidence to the contrary.
Anonymous 5:43:00 PM,
The problem here is that you still haven't provided any evidence to to the contrary.
"Yes, and the problem here is that you still haven't provided any evidence to support that claim.
Regardless, the police are quite used to people lying to them, and are generally skeptical of anything anyone ever tells them. So the idea that the police believe 99% of rape accusations is absurd."
I am never surprised at the number of internet debates where people will demand that others provide evidence to support their claims while simultaneously providing no such evidence to support their own. There must be something similar to Godwin's law to describe this phenomenon.
First you demand evidence, and in the next breath offer nothing but your own wonderful deductive reasoning and good sense to support your own views.
It is well documented in psychological testing that people tend to demand higher standards of evidence and reasoning for claims they are unsympathetic to than those they are more sympathetic to. This alone demonstrates that an individual is not operating from an objective and rational perspective.
"The police don't make the law."
They don't always enforce it either. They would rather not even charge a false accuser with filing a false police report as (in their belief) it could possibly discourage real rape victims from coming forward.
"First you demand evidence, and in the next breath offer nothing but your own wonderful deductive reasoning and good sense to support your own views."
Except that actual studies supporting those views have were cited in the previous thread:
"Currently, the two main identifiable adversaries involved in the false rape allegations controversy are the feminists and the police. The feminists are by far the most expressive and prominent on this issue. Some feminists take the position that the declaration of rape as false or unfounded largely means that the police do not believe the complainant; that is, the rape charges are real reflections of criminal assault, but the agents of the criminal justice system do not believe them (Brownmiller, 1975; Russell, 1984). Some feminists virtually deny the existence of false rape accusations and believe the concept itself constitutes discriminatory harassment toward women (see Grano, 1990). On the other hand, police are prone to say the reason for not believing some rape complainants resides in the fact that the rapes never occurred (Payton, 1967; Wilson, 1978; Jay, 1991). Medical Examiners lend support to this police position by emphasizing the ever-present possibility that rape complainants may be lying (Shill, 1969, 1971)."
"They would rather not even charge a false accuser with filing a false police report as (in their belief) it could possibly discourage real rape victims from coming forward."
Repeating something over and over doesn't make it true.
"I am never surprised at the number of internet debates where people will demand that others provide evidence to support their claims while simultaneously providing no such evidence to support their own."
Putting aside the difference between making a claim and refuting one, it's funny how you redacted the very next sentence:
"And as cited previously, studies have shown that "the police are prone to say the reason for not believing some rape complainants resides in the fact that the rapes never occurred".
"Repeating something over and over doesn't make it true."
Doesn't make it false either. Step up to the plate, show me your evidence to the contrary and quit acting like a troll.
"Doesn't make it false either."
Yes, but in the absence of anything to support it, it is nothing more than ipse dixit, a bare assertion.
"Step up to the plate, show me your evidence to the contrary and quit acting like a troll."
Again, the burden of proof is on you because you are the one making the claim. However, if you want evidence to the contrary, go back and read what has already been posted in this thread.
"Yes, but in the absence of anything to support it, it is nothing more than ipse dixit, a bare assertion."
Well, speak of the devil.
"However, if you want evidence to the contrary, go back and read what has already been posted in this thread."
I did. I ran into ipse dixit.
Post a Comment