If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Woman receives Facebook friend request from the man who raped her when she was 14 years old. She gets the hero tag for how she handled it   (moxiebird.com) divider line 1264
    More: Hero, rape victims, Facebook, electronic publishing, friend request  
•       •       •

66117 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Feb 2012 at 10:49 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1264 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-06 12:07:29 AM  

Bathia_Mapes: ChuDogg: Would those guys be "Golden" if they had consent?

No. Since most states have an age of consent of 16 or greater, she wasn't old enough to give legal consent.


Depends on their age and the states romeo and juliet laws
 
2012-02-06 12:07:36 AM  

Bathia_Mapes: No. Since most states have an age of consent of 16 or greater, she wasn't old enough to give legal consent.


Where are you finding out the ages of these boys? Everything in the article suggests they were peers.

Please advise.
 
2012-02-06 12:08:10 AM  

shastacola: Where does she claim to be exchanging sex for drugs?


You ever read between the lines?

She's playing the rape card so she can absolve herself of the shame and responsibility of sucking cock for drugs. The line of reasoning goes something like this:

Only whores suck cock for drugs, and I am not a whore. Therefore, when I followed a bunch of guys I barely knew to a warehouse, took their drugs, and then sucked their cocks, it must have been rape. Because I'm not some skanky crack whore who'd suck 3 guys off just for a fix.
 
2012-02-06 12:09:20 AM  

clyph: Yes, a prostitute can be raped by a paying customer. That doesn't grant her absolution for prostituting herself in the first place, or (more importantly) help her credibility in the slightest.


what the hell are you talking about?

either a person was raped, or they were not raped.
drunk, whore, wanted drugs, stupid,
none of these things are relevant to whether the rape happened or not.
(the truth of whether the rape happened is for a court of law and not relevant)

facts on the ground
this woman said that she said no. therefore it was rape.
YES, of course, she could be lying. and then she is committing false testimony

everything is immaterial

given the NATURE of everyone else involved and the fact that one of the rapists admitted that it was rape, well then we logically should think that she is telling the truth.

unless the whole thing is fiction
in which case, in the fictional example, the rape victim was raped ....
so RAPE
 
2012-02-06 12:09:31 AM  
Whether it was rape or not, that day in the warehouse is obviously an emotional low point for this poor woman that still causes trauma. These guys sound like low-lifes regardless. It's good she kicked the drugs. She sounds like she's in a better place now, which is the bright spot in this whole clusterfark.

/dated a girl in college who had been raped in the past
//still admire the courage to move on in a healthy way after such horrible things happen to you
 
2012-02-06 12:09:53 AM  

KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: And first thing so many Farkers want to do is accuse her of lying and not really being raped. That's disgusting, and no I don't want to listen to anyone who automatically makes the assumption that women who say they have been raped are liars who brought it on themselves.

Because "more details are needed" constitutes "biatches be lyin".

After reading the article I really don't know how much more detail you need. Though it seems some farkers are willing to fill details like "she was selling herself for drugs" which is not in the article.

Are alcohol and drugs a bad udea at 14? Yes. Should she have been in that warehouse? No.

Does she bear any responisibilty for the actions of the three boys who sexually expoilted and raped her? NO!

Did she deserve to be raped for her bad decisions? NO.

It's like another farker said, if you are sitting in a bar drunk, and another drunk smashes a glass over your head, you are not responsible for their assault. They are the ones that get arrested, not you.


I don't think anyone in this thread is saying the girl wanted or deserved what happened to her. What they are saying is that she put herself in a dangerous situation and something bad happened to her.

To blame her for getting raped is horrible. But to deny that her getting drunk in a deserted location with three older men was a very stupid thing to do and put her in greater likelihood of having a crime committed is disingenuous at best and frightfully naive at worst.
 
2012-02-06 12:10:23 AM  
ok
I get trolling
but RAPE trolling? really???
at least it is an easy place to find more tards for the ignore list

sigh
 
2012-02-06 12:11:32 AM  
Well, if nothing else, I think one thing we can ALL agree on is that namatad really needs to learn how to format a paragraph properly.
 
2012-02-06 12:12:51 AM  

ChuDogg: shastacola: Where does she claim to be exchanging sex for drugs?

"C*** and M*** were supposed to smoke everybody out... Somebody brought you over and told me you were going to give me head. "

She was invited to the drug party to give sexual favors. As was pointed out elsewhere, she was rather overweight during these years, and she admitting she was craving sexual attention and addicted to drugs. It wasn't that she put herself in a dangerous situation, she likely consented to it.

Perhaps she said "no" and resisted during the oral sex session with the two drug dealers? Very possible, however, that's not mentioned in the article. And if we're not going to "read between the lines" on this tiny blurb, then we'd have to accept that she consented to it since we don't have any mention of her resisting the degradations of these two men.


Bullshiat. The "someone brought you over here" refers to the guy who led her over to him with the dog leash after she was at the warehouse.There is absolutely nothing in that conversation between the 2 of them that implies it was a"drug party", nor does she "admit she was adicted to drugs when she was 14", the addiction came after the rape. And so the fark what if she was overweight and craving sexual attention, she was 14 , she is no more asking for rape that any of the other boys there who were also partying. I can see teenage boys convincing themselves that what they did was OK, but grown men on Fark claiming the same is downright creepy.
 
2012-02-06 12:15:55 AM  

Voxper: military armrest: nobody is saying that self-defense course are wrong.

Exactly, nobody seems to say that. And that's my point. It looks illogical for people to exempt self-defense courses from the charge of "victim blaming" which is hollered against anyone else who suggests that it is possible for a woman to do something to improve her own safety. That doesn't make a lot of sense.

That's why the charge of "victim blaming" looks dodgy. It's strictly used to prevent discussions of rape from straying outside of feminist-approved limits.

The problem is that while it can reduce - it does not eliminate the threat of rape.

Eliminate the threat of rape? By the same standard, every single law enforcement and "rape prevention" measure ever taken in the history of humanity has suffered from the exact same problem. Take Back the Night Rallies don't eliminate the threat of rape, either. But when someone says "we need to teach men that rape is wrong! And we need to teach men that consent is right!"? Oh, golly, that's a winning idea? Nonsense.


I need to get to bed, so forgive me I won't be able to reply back. To point one I gave the reason why that is...because some people will default to a woman being able to stop all rapes. If she doesn't then she was asking for it or really did want it to happen. That's why - because it can be used as a tool of victim shaming. Is this the only thing that feminist groups give a pass on, no. One example is the campaign to make women aware of the dangers of drugged drinks and the push for women not to accept opened drinks that they did not see made to reduce the risk. I disagree with the "rule" that by not dressing in a certain way, walking along in a bad neighborhood you will not be raped. The truth is that this is more than a victim blaming mentality. It lures women into a false sense of security. A conservatively dressed women walking in a nice neighborhood being escorted by a gentlemen she has known for a while gets raped . She is going having issues understanding how this could have happened when she followed the rules. That is what the point of getting past this myth about dress/location/the company you keep is fool proof way to not get raped. That is what feminist groups are trying to get past, they are not always using the best way of saying it and that does need improving because far to often they get off of topic or go into full on man hating derp which is a disservice to the women they claim to want to help - I don't totally disagree with you for that. But it does need to be address - both sides need to work on there communication about the "rules".

Point 2 - I don't think anyone thinks that teaching men that no means no will stop all rapes. To be honest you still get into problem of rapist who preemptively decide to rape. Nothing the woman says is going to stop it, hopefully she can fight him off. I think the movement is trying get to the date rape caused by influences of drugs/booze. I do agree with you that they really need to expand on the "no means no" to educating women to be very direct about how they feel about the situation. One thing in my class that they did teach was to scream (not say ) No and Stop. But to also scream "stop your raping me", while this will not always stop the guy - when you go to court you will be able to say that you made him aware of how you viewed the intercourse while it was happening. On the same side men need to understand that because she is under the affects of alcohol or drugs does not mean she is 100% free game. If she does make it know that she wants the guy to stop ...mentally decided that what she is saying doesn't matter cause you think she does want it isn't going to cut it. How many men they are going to reach is debatable - hopefully it does change some guys minds that drunk = free to do whatever they want.
 
2012-02-06 12:16:04 AM  

clyph: shastacola: Where does she claim to be exchanging sex for drugs?

You ever read between the lines?

She's playing the rape card so she can absolve herself of the shame and responsibility of sucking cock for drugs. The line of reasoning goes something like this:

Only whores suck cock for drugs, and I am not a whore. Therefore, when I followed a bunch of guys I barely knew to a warehouse, took their drugs, and then sucked their cocks, it must have been rape. Because I'm not some skanky crack whore who'd suck 3 guys off just for a fix.


You sound like you need help. Good luck with that.
 
2012-02-06 12:16:22 AM  

namatad: ok
I get trolling
but RAPE trolling? really???
at least it is an easy place to find more tards for the ignore list

sigh


I don't see anyone rape trolling here, at least not in the last hour or so.

I see two groups having a discussion. Both sides are bringing up reasonable points, and doing so reasonably.

So be honest and call that ignore list or ostrich list, or, the I got nothing list.

Put me on it to, because my script automagically plonks anyone who threatens with ignore.

*plonk*

Ignore is like the dumbest feature of fark. Encouraging idiots who afraid of a little argument to bully others.
 
2012-02-06 12:19:01 AM  

shastacola: Bullshiat. The "someone brought you over here" refers to the guy who led her over to him with the dog leash after she was at the warehouse.There is absolutely nothing in that conversation between the 2 of them that implies it was a"drug party", nor does she "admit she was adicted to drugs when she was 14", the addiction came after the rape. And so the fark what if she was overweight and craving sexual attention, she was 14 , she is no more asking for rape that any of the other boys there who were also partying. I can see teenage boys convincing themselves that what they did was OK, but grown men on Fark claiming the same is downright creepy.


To be honest shastacola you're doing a lot of "reading between the lines" here and I think we should just stick with the facts presented in the tiny 30 second blurb of an article that was based on their conversation.
 
2012-02-06 12:19:09 AM  

bhcompy: KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: And first thing so many Farkers want to do is accuse her of lying and not really being raped. That's disgusting, and no I don't want to listen to anyone who automatically makes the assumption that women who say they have been raped are liars who brought it on themselves.

Because "more details are needed" constitutes "biatches be lyin".

After reading the article I really don't know how much more detail you need. Though it seems some farkers are willing to fill details like "she was selling herself for drugs" which is not in the article.

Are alcohol and drugs a bad udea at 14? Yes. Should she have been in that warehouse? No.

Does she bear any responisibilty for the actions of the three boys who sexually expoilted and raped her? NO!

Did she deserve to be raped for her bad decisions? NO.

It's like another farker said, if you are sitting in a bar drunk, and another drunk smashes a glass over your head, you are not responsible for their assault. They are the ones that get arrested, not you.

How about this: A shred of non-circumstantial evidence. A reliable witness. Testimony from someone that doesn't say "I was under the impression it was consensual"(if you assume that the conversation actually happened). etc

Being accused of rape is a death sentence to your future in America. The fact that she's airing out this dirty laundry for all to read could easily read to her being sued for defamation if the person is doxed. It's reckless. If she truly had something compelling, she should go to the cops. Many states do not have statutes of limitations on rape, particularly when they involve a minor.


In your rush to prove her a liar, you missed the entire point of the article.

But its not the first time the concepts of forgiveness and closure have gone over people's heads.

She isn't accusing anyone, this isn't about throwing anyone in jail or destroying anyone's career. That's why she didn't name names. This is about showing one of the final steps in recovery.

And it kind of disgusting that even examples of forgiveness are ignored in the rush to blame the victim or make her out to be a liar.
 
2012-02-06 12:22:51 AM  
I've read some of the comments in this thread. The victim blaming in here is enough to turn my stomach. I highly suggest to anyone who has read this to not discuss this topic on Fark. It's not the proper place to have a discussion about it.

/seriously
 
2012-02-06 12:23:47 AM  

KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: And first thing so many Farkers want to do is accuse her of lying and not really being raped. That's disgusting, and no I don't want to listen to anyone who automatically makes the assumption that women who say they have been raped are liars who brought it on themselves.

Because "more details are needed" constitutes "biatches be lyin".

After reading the article I really don't know how much more detail you need. Though it seems some farkers are willing to fill details like "she was selling herself for drugs" which is not in the article.

Are alcohol and drugs a bad udea at 14? Yes. Should she have been in that warehouse? No.

Does she bear any responisibilty for the actions of the three boys who sexually expoilted and raped her? NO!

Did she deserve to be raped for her bad decisions? NO.

It's like another farker said, if you are sitting in a bar drunk, and another drunk smashes a glass over your head, you are not responsible for their assault. They are the ones that get arrested, not you.

How about this: A shred of non-circumstantial evidence. A reliable witness. Testimony from someone that doesn't say "I was under the impression it was consensual"(if you assume that the conversation actually happened). etc

Being accused of rape is a death sentence to your future in America. The fact that she's airing out this dirty laundry for all to read could easily read to her being sued for defamation if the person is doxed. It's reckless. If she truly had something compelling, she should go to the cops. Many states do not have statutes of limitations on rape, particularly when they involve a minor.

In your rush to prove her a liar, you missed the entire point of the article.

But its not the first time the concepts of forgiveness and closure have gone over people's heads.

She isn't accusing anyone, this isn't about throwing anyone in jail or destroying anyone's career. That's why she didn't name names. This is about ...


There is far too much information present for that. FB picture, initials, her own name, etc. This is a published document that qualifies under 1, and possibly 2, of the categories for defamation per se. If she truly wanted to hide that there were better ways to do it
 
2012-02-06 12:26:33 AM  

bhcompy: KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: And first thing so many Farkers want to do is accuse her of lying and not really being raped. That's disgusting, and no I don't want to listen to anyone who automatically makes the assumption that women who say they have been raped are liars who brought it on themselves.

Because "more details are needed" constitutes "biatches be lyin".

After reading the article I really don't know how much more detail you need. Though it seems some farkers are willing to fill details like "she was selling herself for drugs" which is not in the article.

Are alcohol and drugs a bad udea at 14? Yes. Should she have been in that warehouse? No.

Does she bear any responisibilty for the actions of the three boys who sexually expoilted and raped her? NO!

Did she deserve to be raped for her bad decisions? NO.

It's like another farker said, if you are sitting in a bar drunk, and another drunk smashes a glass over your head, you are not responsible for their assault. They are the ones that get arrested, not you.

How about this: A shred of non-circumstantial evidence. A reliable witness. Testimony from someone that doesn't say "I was under the impression it was consensual"(if you assume that the conversation actually happened). etc

Being accused of rape is a death sentence to your future in America. The fact that she's airing out this dirty laundry for all to read could easily read to her being sued for defamation if the person is doxed. It's reckless. If she truly had something compelling, she should go to the cops. Many states do not have statutes of limitations on rape, particularly when they involve a minor.

In your rush to prove her a liar, you missed the entire point of the article.

But its not the first time the concepts of forgiveness and closure have gone over people's heads.

She isn't accusing anyone, this isn't about throwing anyone in jail or destroying anyone's career. That's why she didn't name names. This is about ...

There is far too much information present for that. FB picture, initials, her own name, etc. This is a published document that qualifies under 1, and possibly 2, of the categories for defamation per se. If she truly wanted to hide that there were better ways to do it


I am sorry, but how does publishing her own name make slander against men only identified a single letters?

That's seriously reaching to make her out to be the villain of the piece.
 
2012-02-06 12:30:16 AM  

shastacola: You sound like you need help. Good luck with that.


Which part of my version is inconsistent with the facts as we know them?

She willing went to a warehouse with some guys she barely knew to take drugs. She wound up sucking their cocks after they got her high. Hanlon's Razor says the simplest hypothesis is the most likely, and given my experience, quid pro quo is a FAR more likely scenario than rape. 14 or not she wasn't some blushing innocent. Maybe you haven't met many addicts, but they'll do anything and say anything for that next high.

I just asked my 14 year old stepdaughter daughter what she thought would happen if some guys she barely knew wanted to go off somewhere private and get high together... her exact words: "They'd probably expect me to have sex with them".
 
2012-02-06 12:32:43 AM  

KiplingKat872: That's seriously reaching to make her out to be the villain of the piece.


I clearly said reckless. No where have I said villain.
 
2012-02-06 12:36:07 AM  

clyph: Hanlon's Razor says the simplest hypothesis is the most likely,


Hanlon's razor is "Never attribute to malice, with what can best be explained by stupidity".

Works just as well here though.
 
2012-02-06 12:36:44 AM  

clyph: shastacola: You sound like you need help. Good luck with that.

Which part of my version is inconsistent with the facts as we know them?

She willing went to a warehouse with some guys she barely knew to take drugs. She wound up sucking their cocks after they got her high. Hanlon's Razor says the simplest hypothesis is the most likely, and given my experience, quid pro quo is a FAR more likely scenario than rape. 14 or not she wasn't some blushing innocent. Maybe you haven't met many addicts, but they'll do anything and say anything for that next high.

I just asked my 14 year old stepdaughter daughter what she thought would happen if some guys she barely knew wanted to go off somewhere private and get high together... her exact words: "They'd probably expect me to have sex with them".


Now this is true hearsay. You have nothing that proves that. Nothing in the articles days she went there to do anything but hang out and smoke some weed.

I used to hang out, drink, and smoke with my friends in high school. I never slept with them for it, nor was I raped by them.
 
2012-02-06 12:38:29 AM  

clyph: shastacola: You sound like you need help. Good luck with that.

Which part of my version is inconsistent with the facts as we know them?

She willing went to a warehouse with some guys she barely knew to take drugs. She wound up sucking their cocks after they got her high. Occam's Razor says the simplest hypothesis is the most likely, and given my experience, quid pro quo is a FAR more likely scenario than rape. 14 or not she wasn't some blushing innocent. Maybe you haven't met many addicts, but they'll do anything and say anything for that next high.

I just asked my 14 year old stepdaughter daughter what she thought would happen if some guys she barely knew wanted to go off somewhere private and get high together... her exact words: "They'd probably expect me to have sex with them".


Hanlon's Razor is an eponymous adage that reads:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor
 
2012-02-06 12:38:30 AM  

Cyrusv10: I've read some of the comments in this thread. The victim blaming in here is enough to turn my stomach. I highly suggest to anyone who has read this to not discuss this topic on Fark. It's not the proper place to have a discussion about it.

/seriously


memedepot.com
 
2012-02-06 12:38:56 AM  

bhcompy: KiplingKat872: That's seriously reaching to make her out to be the villain of the piece.

I clearly said reckless. No where have I said villain.


No, just now trying to accuse her of slander.
 
2012-02-06 12:40:43 AM  

military armrest: Point 2 - I don't think anyone thinks that teaching men that no means no will stop all rapes.


What about teaching women that "no means no" not "maybe yes in a few minutes".

If you even mutter "no", then it's over and you need to call a cab because someone is going to be leaving.
 
2012-02-06 12:54:15 AM  

clyph: I just asked my 14 year old stepdaughter daughter what she thought would happen if some guys she barely knew wanted to go off somewhere private and get high together... her exact words: "They'd probably expect me to have sex with them".


Perhaps we need to break down rape into clearer intent like murder.

First degree: violent assault + rape. Injuries both physical and mental.

Second degree: I willingly put myself in a risky situation through ignorance or intent and may have sent conflicting signals. Sex happened against my intentions; I might have said "no" but can't remember if I said it or meant it. I was humiliated afterwards.

Manslutter: I really said "yes" and jumped his bones, but I had buyer's remorse and didn't want to be hounded by guilt over my decision I regretted after the fact, so I'm claiming "rape" now.

As said many times prior in the thread:

If you leave your nice car unlocked with the keys in the ignition in a bad area of town, you don't "deserve" to be a victim, but you bear responsibility in your actions leading up to and setting the stage for a crime to happen. Saying "no stealing my car means: no" is not a magic phrase that will cover your loss.
 
2012-02-06 12:55:01 AM  

ChuDogg: Bathia_Mapes: No. Since most states have an age of consent of 16 or greater, she wasn't old enough to give legal consent.

Where are you finding out the ages of these boys? Everything in the article suggests they were peers.

Please advise.


Ok so it was conjecture. I didn't think you would be returning after.
 
2012-02-06 12:56:22 AM  
Yes it will, to both the cops and the insurance company.

Theft is theft.

And rape is rape.
 
2012-02-06 12:57:22 AM  

lohphat: clyph: I just asked my 14 year old stepdaughter daughter what she thought would happen if some guys she barely knew wanted to go off somewhere private and get high together... her exact words: "They'd probably expect me to have sex with them".

Perhaps we need to break down rape into clearer intent like murder.

First degree: violent assault + rape. Injuries both physical and mental.

Second degree: I willingly put myself in a risky situation through ignorance or intent and may have sent conflicting signals. Sex happened against my intentions; I might have said "no" but can't remember if I said it or meant it. I was humiliated afterwards.

Manslutter: I really said "yes" and jumped his bones, but I had buyer's remorse and didn't want to be hounded by guilt over my decision I regretted after the fact, so I'm claiming "rape" now.

As said many times prior in the thread:

If you leave your nice car unlocked with the keys in the ignition in a bad area of town, you don't "deserve" to be a victim, but you bear responsibility in your actions leading up to and setting the stage for a crime to happen. Saying "no stealing my car means: no" is not a magic phrase that will cover your loss.


Sorry, above post was responding to this.
 
2012-02-06 12:59:10 AM  
 
2012-02-06 01:01:21 AM  

KiplingKat872: I used to hang out, drink, and smoke with my friends in high school. I never slept with them for it, nor was I raped by them.


There's a big difference between "friends" and "some sketchy guys I barely know who say they can hook me up"
 
2012-02-06 01:04:00 AM  

lohphat: KiplingKat872: Yes it will, to both the cops and the insurance company.

Theft is theft.

And rape is rape.

Some carriers, too, do not look favorably on practically handing your car over to thieves by leaving it running unattended in your driveway with the keys in the ignition and doors unlocked. As a result, they might have language in the coverage to exclude the policyholder from claiming a loss if this should happen. Read your policy carefully. (new window)


The cops will still consider it theft.

/False anologies are false
// Has a much better insurance company than you.
 
2012-02-06 01:04:06 AM  

KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: That's seriously reaching to make her out to be the villain of the piece.

I clearly said reckless. No where have I said villain.

No, just now trying to accuse her of slander.


I didn't accuse her of slander. I said she puts herself at risk for defamation and her reckless unsubstantiated public accusation can also ruin someone's life.
 
2012-02-06 01:04:39 AM  

clyph: KiplingKat872: I used to hang out, drink, and smoke with my friends in high school. I never slept with them for it, nor was I raped by them.

There's a big difference between "friends" and "some sketchy guys I barely know who say they can hook me up"


And where does she say that?
 
2012-02-06 01:05:37 AM  
military armrest: You gave a thoughtful response. That's wonderful.

Personally, I think the best key to eliminating rape is for women and men to have a reality-based understanding of it. But I think the knee-jerk charge of "victim-blaming" frequently shuts-down any attempt to arrive at a reality-based understanding. There is enormous resistance to teaching women how to be more direct in their communication, for instance. Such a thing is perceived as letting "rapists" escape 100% of the blame. Plus there are the silly double-standards: I had a girlfriend who sought sex with me while ignoring my explicit 'no', causing her to react with threats and harassment against me until I relented and had sex with her. So I'm a rape victim too, right? Well, no. "That's different."

Phooey. But thank you for treating my question thoughtfully.
 
2012-02-06 01:06:50 AM  

KiplingKat872: Yes it will, to both the cops and the insurance company.

Theft is theft.

And rape is rape.


If any sexual advance -- including post facto consensual sex -- is to be defined as rape. Then we need another balanced law respecting male hormones that punishes intentional teasing for sex and subsequent refusal.

If males are to learn "no means no", then women need to respect men with "I will not tease or send false or ambiguous signals" because when you say "no" you're getting kicked to the curb permanently after edging the male into a hormonal carbonation state.

Fair is fair. Welcome to gender equality. If we have to respect your hormonal cycles, you have to respect ours.
 
2012-02-06 01:07:50 AM  

bhcompy: KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: That's seriously reaching to make her out to be the villain of the piece.

I clearly said reckless. No where have I said villain.

No, just now trying to accuse her of slander.

I didn't accuse her of slander. I said she puts herself at risk for defamation and her reckless unsubstantiated public accusation can also ruin someone's life.


Again, how is publishing her own name "defaming" someone only identified by a single letter?
 
2012-02-06 01:08:45 AM  

KiplingKat872: // Has a much better insurance company than you.


I would hope that my insurance company doesn't not use my premiums in paying out claims to morons who leave their cars unsecured and passing the cost on to me.
 
2012-02-06 01:08:46 AM  
Abuse of alcohol and drugs made it difficult for her to distinctly and positively confirm what she recalled.

Oh really.....
 
2012-02-06 01:10:41 AM  

Novart: Abuse of alcohol and drugs made it difficult for her to distinctly and positively confirm what she recalled.

Oh really.....


As said earlier, it worked for Roman Polanski.
 
2012-02-06 01:17:53 AM  

KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: That's seriously reaching to make her out to be the villain of the piece.

I clearly said reckless. No where have I said villain.

No, just now trying to accuse her of slander.

I didn't accuse her of slander. I said she puts herself at risk for defamation and her reckless unsubstantiated public accusation can also ruin someone's life.

Again, how is publishing her own name "defaming" someone only identified by a single letter?


Because she left easy clues to identify the person, as in the fact that this person is her FB friend, the FB photo, the initials of the name, and her name on Facebook.
 
2012-02-06 01:19:05 AM  

Voxper: military armrest: You gave a thoughtful response. That's wonderful.

Personally, I think the best key to eliminating rape is for women and men to have a reality-based understanding of it. But I think the knee-jerk charge of "victim-blaming" frequently shuts-down any attempt to arrive at a reality-based understanding. There is enormous resistance to teaching women how to be more direct in their communication, for instance. Such a thing is perceived as letting "rapists" escape 100% of the blame. Plus there are the silly double-standards: I had a girlfriend who sought sex with me while ignoring my explicit 'no', causing her to react with threats and harassment against me until I relented and had sex with her. So I'm a rape victim too, right? Well, no. "That's different."

Phooey. But thank you for treating my question thoughtfully.


If you were coerced into sex, you are a rape victim.

Period.

And I think victim blaming itself is what shuts down any useful discussion. Its incredibly offensive, usually ignorant, and frequently used to mitigate the rapists resposibility. Should people act responsibly and safe? Yes, but that is no garuntee they will not be raped and even when they do act irresponsibly, they are NOT responsible for the actions of a rapist.
 
2012-02-06 01:23:59 AM  

lohphat: KiplingKat872: Yes it will, to both the cops and the insurance company.

Theft is theft.

And rape is rape.

If any sexual advance -- including post facto consensual sex -- is to be defined as rape. Then we need another balanced law respecting male hormones that punishes intentional teasing for sex and subsequent refusal.

If males are to learn "no means no", then women need to respect men with "I will not tease or send false or ambiguous signals" because when you say "no" you're getting kicked to the curb permanently after edging the male into a hormonal carbonation state.

Fair is fair. Welcome to gender equality. If we have to respect your hormonal cycles, you have to respect ours.


Who the hell said any sexual advance is to be defined as rape?

Rape is clearly defined in the law. If the definition is too hard for people to understand, maybe they should not be allowed outside.

I am sorry you got blue balls, but if you think that is even remotely comperable to rape, you are pathetically self absorbed.
 
2012-02-06 01:26:09 AM  

KiplingKat872: Again, how is publishing her own name "defaming" someone only identified by a single letter?


Just for the sake of argument, we know her name, Emily McCombs, we know how old she is , 28 or 29, and here are the names of the other involved, because she is actually very careful with her use of asterisks.

Mike
Carl (whose father owns a shiatty warehouse.)
Daniel (suspected to hog head)
John
Saul (or Scar)

Cynthia (who is a big gossip, becareful what you tell her.)
 
2012-02-06 01:27:12 AM  

bhcompy: KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: bhcompy: KiplingKat872: That's seriously reaching to make her out to be the villain of the piece.

I clearly said reckless. No where have I said villain.

No, just now trying to accuse her of slander.

I didn't accuse her of slander. I said she puts herself at risk for defamation and her reckless unsubstantiated public accusation can also ruin someone's life.

Again, how is publishing her own name "defaming" someone only identified by a single letter?

Because she left easy clues to identify the person, as in the fact that this person is her FB friend, the FB photo, the initials of the name, and her name on Facebook.


And most people have how many hundreds of friends on fb?

Again, if this story has been around for months and he is so easy to ID, why hasn't he been?
 
2012-02-06 01:29:16 AM  

KiplingKat872: If you were coerced into sex, you are a rape victim.

Period.


Define "coercion".

Is buying drinks at a bar and/or she inviting me over for sex, rape?
 
2012-02-06 01:30:45 AM  

KiplingKat872: lohphat: KiplingKat872: Yes it will, to both the cops and the insurance company.

Theft is theft.

And rape is rape.

If any sexual advance -- including post facto consensual sex -- is to be defined as rape. Then we need another balanced law respecting male hormones that punishes intentional teasing for sex and subsequent refusal.

If males are to learn "no means no", then women need to respect men with "I will not tease or send false or ambiguous signals" because when you say "no" you're getting kicked to the curb permanently after edging the male into a hormonal carbonation state.

Fair is fair. Welcome to gender equality. If we have to respect your hormonal cycles, you have to respect ours.

Who the hell said any sexual advance is to be defined as rape?

Rape is clearly defined in the law. If the definition is too hard for people to understand, maybe they should not be allowed outside.

I am sorry you got blue balls, but if you think that is even remotely comperable to rape, you are pathetically self absorbed.


Actually, if you get teasing legislation, then people should be able to bring charges against dates who failed to call when they said they would and standing people up/cancelling dates less than 24 hours in advance.
 
2012-02-06 01:33:22 AM  

lohphat: KiplingKat872: If you were coerced into sex, you are a rape victim.

Period.

Define "coercion".

Is buying drinks at a bar and/or she inviting me over for sex, rape?


No. Why would you even think that.

"Threats and harassment" as the poster described is coercion.
 
2012-02-06 01:34:26 AM  

KiplingKat872: I am sorry you got blue balls, but if you think that is even remotely comperable to rape, you are pathetically self absorbed.


Actually contract law has provisions for this. Note the AT&T $4B payout to T-Mobile for a failed encounter.

Why is the sexual manipulation of women a horrendous crime but not the inverse? All I'm asking is that if man are to be legally obligated to "respect the wishes of women" why is asking the same from them any different? Why can't there be equality under the law?
 
2012-02-06 01:34:58 AM  
Apparently her rape tale made it to On The Media today.

http://www.onthemedia.org/2012/feb/03/friend-request/

BrendaKilgour

"Not long ago, writer Emily McCombs received a friend request from a man who had raped her in her adolescence."

Who needs criminal punishment when NPR has the power to convict in absentia?

This is what makes this story truly reprehensible.
 
Displayed 50 of 1264 comments

First | « | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report