"In college, I saw too many friends and acquaintances getting drunk and doing things they regretted the next day. But when both parties were drunk and engaged in sex, I never saw the male as more culpable than the female. Both of them made poor decisions. While I believe that date rape occurs, I also think that young women and men act irresponsibly in tandem at times. There are times when sexual activity is coerced in dating situations and that’s clearly wrong. But there are cases where it’s not so clear and I think it’s fair to acknowledge that."
Atlanta writer Maureen Downey, found here: http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/03/31/date-rape-on-campus-are-the-lines-blurrier-than-we-admit/?cxntfid=blogs_get_schooled_blog
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
30 comments:
I left a long comment. Hasn't shown up yet.
Everyone needs to read the Chef's brilliant comment: here
Snark,
That was an awesome response. Perfect.
I am the one who wrote that article. A few things I dealed with were alcohol abuse and a distrust of women in general. The fear of this happening again almost robbed myself of my 20's. By That I mean learning from bad situations and seriously the bar scene.
I had a few very best friends from the military who helped me. The best person who helped me though was AFOR. He wrote,"(im paraphrasing) why would you let someone who was late for work ruin your life." I had a very bit of that idea in my head but as soon as he said it I got it.
Move past it bro, its hard I know. Just talk to women again and you will see not all women are like that. My favorite is my current girlfriend who after a few months asked why I was so weird concerning male/female relationships.
She supports me sees what I went through and works past it. What I am saying is find a female you can trust. I am not about marriage or children but I want you to find a female "friend" who you can discuss this issue with.
Talk to your mom, sister(s), cousin(s) etc. You need to talk to someone. I have a female counselor who has helped me out a ton(I don't see her anymore). I will talk to you personally if you live anywhere near PA. I am glad my story helped you out though. My email address is darid123456@yahoo.com.
American University Erupts Over Date Rape Column
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/date-rape-firestorm-erupts-american-university-student-newspaper/story?id=10254150
http://www.theeagleonline.com/opinion/story/dealing-with-aus-anti-sex-brigade/
Yes good comment by Snark. Hit all the crucial points.
This article caused "outrage" because the truth is dangerous to feminist tyrants and their enablers. They must suppress truth at all costs so as not to alert and wake up men to what's really going on around them. They've been very successful for decades now, but thanks again to the internet we've been able to subvert their iron-fisted control and censorship. The outrage this article has caused has worked in our favor too, because it has brought more attention to it.
I give credit to this Knepper guy, hopefully he doesn't start capitulating (the fact that he's gay allows him more leeway btw) and also the editors of the paper, a few women I think, for standing by the article.
It is a perversion of our society that is forced to "always believe the women" when she says she has been raped.
We are forced to believe her EVEN WHEN SHE IS LYING!!!
re "not all women are like that"...
Women will care greatly about the men close to them but beyond that...
The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests.
- Doris Lessing 2001
This is a reply to the new post that appeared and then vanished again.
------------
We have a problem here in the UK, it is an economic problem, we do not make anything any more.
Since we do not make anything, we do not create any wealth, we just shuffle paper and fiat money around, and the facts prove this.
Over half of the money that moves in this country (GDP) is actually public, or state spending. Over 50% of our economy is the state, and they produce precisely nothing.
Reminiscent of the recent "too big to fail" banking crises, we have a situation where state spending is too big to fail, if it is cut back it will, all by itself, trigger a catastrophic economic collapse.
Of course, if it is not cut back, it is a malignant tumour sapping all the energy from the country, and will inevitably lead to catastrophic economic collapse.
Looking at my case alone, one of some 50,000 annually in the UK, the total cost to the public purse will be in excess of 125k UK Pounds Sterling, so multiply by 50k and we have...
6,250,000,000 UK pounds annually.
1,500,000 police man/days
250,000 court days, each using a minimum of one senior judge, 3 court staff in court, 4 lawyers and 2 barristers, plus court support staff.
Increasingly the police and the state are fulfilling targets by chasing the easy to detect, easy to prosecute, easy to score a point, case, such as targeting pensioners.
In the past 5 years the numbers of pensioners arrested and prosecuted has shot through the roof, and still 95% of these pensioners are men, for such heinous crimes as rollerblading (public safety) theft (walking out of DIY store with sample sink plug that you walked in with, without paying for it...) animal welfare (pet shop selling a goldfish to a 14 year old boy) civil (refusing to pay the fine for the rubbish bin being overfilled) etc etc etc.
Ultimately, what is going to bring down the house of cards that is feminist influence, is money, it all costs money, and it doesn't produce anything, except more state funded employees and more state expenditure.
Here in the UK, the shrieking is already happening as the feminist quangos scream desperately for continued funding (there are fewer and fewer calls for increased funding) when regional governments have to make cuts, the feminists shriek "make the cuts elsewhere"
For a time, this will work, there is pork in all areas, there has to be with the state representing >50% of GDP, but, those areas scream too.
We're not that far away from the point where the choice is going to be between some feminist agenda, and having the rubbish taken away, and at that point it all collapses like a house of cards.
We are getting very close to the point where it is possible to do immoral and illegal things, and never go to court for them, provided you pick your crime, because the system is already overloaded to bursting point.
All this will end, not (just) because of advocacy and action by men who are "as mad as hell and aren't going to take it any more" (oblig movie quote there) but because there simply isn't the money in the public purse to fund the man/hours required to sustain these cancerous tumours.
I will live to see it, and I will *THOROUGHLY* enjoy the inevitable backlash, and will not miss a single opportunity to tell all the post feminists "told you so, but you wouldn't listen... now get back to scrubbing those floors."
http://robertwhiston.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/15/
an excellent and well worth reading, very on topic, blog post.
"This is a reply to the new post that appeared and then vanished again."
I was wondering about that.
Post isn't ready yet -- was accidentally triggered to run today but it shouldn't have. It will run in the next couple of days.
OK, my comment would have been about the 2:1 victim to rapist ratio. While that might be statistically tenable, it's not congruent with everything else we know about the pathology of rape. I would argue that rape is subject to both over reporting and under reporting, and that the false conviction rate for rape is much higher than for other crimes.
Anon, read
http://robertwhiston.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/15/
2nd time posting this link in this thread..
this is from one of the founders of fathers for justice, he has access to factual official data, and uses it, and shows it.
the link above deals with rape, once you hav eread that, read the rest of his blog.
should be compulsory reading for all concerned with rape / domestic violence / child custody.
ABC news is almost as bad as CNN with their blatant man hating.
Anon at 9:53: Unfortunately, most of what we "know" about rape isn't at all reliable because the entire field has become so terribly politicized.
For example: I have a post coming next week on the National Crime Victimization Survey, which is touted by the sexual grievance industry (note, they trust telephone surveys, but not Prof. Kanin's careful study -- go figure).
Amazingly, the survey defines rape to include psychological coercion. I nearly fell off my chair when I discovered that. By that standard, of course, most adults involved in a committed relationship, women AND men, have been raped many times.
How reliable are these telephone surveys? Well, look at it this way: for even rapes that are reported to police, we can only be reasonably certain a fraction were actual rapes. The rest are dismissed because they are blatantly false, or for any number of reasons. It is dishonest in the extreme to suggest that these unknowables should be considered "rape" for no reason other than a woman said she was raped. The fact is, we just don't know. Period. No one can plausibly refute that -- except to say "women don't lie about rape." Sigh.
So how much more reliable are telephone surveys, where women can make untested assertions without having the other side of the story looked at? Without knowing if the women who claimed they were "raped" understood that the test is whether the male reasonably understood there was consent? Remember the Koss study follow-up, where a significant number of "rape victims" said that they wouldn't call it rape because the other party might not have understood there was no consent?
Add to this the fact that rape includes psychological coercion -- a condition that is clearly NOT rape anywhere except, I suppose, in Women's Studies class.
Dishonesty is rampant in this area, and it's goal is to achieve a political objective.
This nation is in need of a serious dialogue about rape, and a careful study by people who have zero interest in the subject. That means that people like Marcella Chester and I shouldn't be involved.
As it is we really don't know much about rape at all, except it can be a horrible crime, and that too many women lie about it, which is often even more horrible.
http://barristermagazine.com/articles/issue32/conway.html
When Memory is the Evidence: Key Points from the Science of Human Memory
By Professor Martin A. Conway, Institute of Psychological Sciences, University of Leeds
also very very much worth a read.
Anybody see this ridiculous attack on Tiger Woods in the New York Times? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/sports/golf/04anderson.html The henpecking of American males continues!
And as usual, women don't need to bash Tiger Woods, because they have a mangina to do it for them.
I wish this blog featured a Mangina of the Week, so that we could ridicule these wimps.
Most of the "manginas" would be on college campuses, teaching or enrolled -- they just KNOW we're evil here.
Our real problem is the self-hating American male, who gets brownie points for betraying his own kind.
"Our real problem is the self-hating American male, who gets brownie points for betraying his own kind."
I don't think he's self-hating, he just doesn't think of himself as part of a group, that's all. Nobody in the mainstream media treats "men" as a group. And there is some basis for that perception -- men skew so widely it is very difficult to pin us down. That's why it is important to pick our spots narrowly to SHOW "in family law court, men are routinely discriminated against," etc.
"Anon, read
http://robertwhiston.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/15/
2nd time posting this link in this thread.."
But what exactly is your point regarding actual rapists?
"Anon at 9:53: Unfortunately, most of what we "know" about rape isn't at all reliable because the entire field has become so terribly politicized."
While I agree that rape has become terribly politicized, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
And yes, the NCVS would be an example of advocacy research. There is also the NWS, NWS-R, NVAWS, NISVSS, etc. from past years. And they are all bullshit. But let's ignore that we know that they are bullshit based on their methodology and definitions used, and just look at their resulting numbers. The NCVS says that rape has a past-year prevalence of .18%, but the NWS-R said that it's .90%. That's five times the amount of rape. If something weighed 18 lbs. on one scale and 90 lbs. on the other, any sane person would conclude that at least one of the scales are broken. Although I do like how the same people who publish the NCVS simultaneously recite the hallowed one-in-four number. Apparently, they think women live to an average age of 139 years.
Regardless, never mind that these asshats are cooking up bogus numbers or that we might have a better idea of how much rape actually occurs if almost all research was not in the vibrating hands of feminists. Let's put aside the depths of criminal psychology, or that an arithmetic mean is a poor way to determine such a ratio, or any analysis of the FBI numbers. Let's merely retain our common sense. Rapists rape. Criminals will continue to commit crimes until they are caught. Whatever makes a rapist rape isn't going to go away after one or two victims. While there are very good arguments that almost all rapists are serial rapists, excluding that deduction, there is no controversy that some serial rapists exist based on known examples. So if what is being concluded from the DOJ numbers is correct, it would mean that the vast majority of rapists who are caught are not only reported, successfully identified, and arrested, but convicted, after their first and only rape. Which is simply unbelievable.
While I know from your past entries that you like to count rape convictions as rapes we know have occurred, imho, the only logical conclusion is that is often not the case, and the false conviction rate is a statistically significant but undetermined number, excluded from the ratio you cited.
3rd wave Gender / Raunch feminism has done more to objectify (and turn girls into hookers) then men could ever do. Gender / Raunch feminism has turned our nations youth both male and female, into sexual perverts.
Anon at 6:01, I do appreciate good writing -- I enjoyed reading your comment, and if you feel so inclined, I wish you'd write to me -- falserape@yahoo.com
You are correct that the numbers are a moving target. I suspect you might have done this already, but for fun sometime, try to reconcile any of that with their underreporting stats. It is insulting to what's left of my intelligence.
I can't argue with your conclusion about wrongful convictions. I suppose I am injecting my knowledge of how conservative most juries are, but that's only a gut reaction. I do try to make the point that the roughly 15 percent that end in convictions don't subtract any that might have been wrongly convicted. But I can't argue with you.
Excellent comment!
The link I posted links to a 136 page Home Office study into rape in the UK.
yes, it blatantly attempts to spin things feminista wise.
however, it is by far the most complete record available, and goes in to GREAT details, even mentions specifically that Rape Squad cops are the most sceptical people on the planet, with some GREAT quotes... such as
Well, honestly, it’s because most of them are not telling the truth … I think what
happens to a lot of adults is they may have consensual sex with somebody, they get
found out by their husband, partner, whoever, they then say “Oh but I didn’t consent”
as a way of getting themselves out of that trouble … I mean I have dealt with
hundreds and hundreds of rapes in the last few years, and I can honestly probably
count on both hands the ones that I believe are truly genuine.
(Comparison 1, Police Officer DC, M2, June 2002)
You quoted an AJC journalist, who described her friends' sexual encounters in college:
".... But when both parties were drunk and engaged in sex, I never saw the male as more culpable than the female........ "
No serious journalist would make such a ridiculous statement. How would she know who's more culpable unless she watched her friends having sex?
Can't believe you quoted that nonsense.
"How would she know who's more culpable unless she watched her friends having sex?"
That's the point. She doesn't make assumptions.
"No serious journalist would make such a ridiculous statement. How would she know who's more culpable unless she watched her friends having sex? Can't believe you quoted that nonsense."
That's because you are an ideological partisan who has overshot your abilities by challenging me. Every fair-minded person agrees with the writer: without anything more, it's not fair, it's not just -- to use your word, it's unequivocally "nonsense" -- to blame the male, just because he's the male, when both parties are drunk and have sex.
How would she know who's more culpable unless she watched her friends having sex?
***
I dunno; common sense, listening to what they and their friends said about the sex afterwards, etc?
And do you KNOW she didn't watch the sex? Wellllll?
Post a Comment