Posted on 01/06/2003 6:33:57 PM PST by RCW2001
"Penetration, however slight...."
Blue.
That's "congratulations". Thank you though.
According to the later article, the girl was persistent in her efforts to make the boy stop. While I find it surprising that she didn't escalate rather more in her efforts, her persistence would show a clear and unmistakable intention. I find it puzzling that one of the judges would fail to recognize the relevance of that.
[BTW, perhaps I'm unduly cynical with regard to the California courts, but I would not have been unduly surprised if the majority of judges ruled that two ambiguous utterances over a period of 90 seconds should constitute evidence of non-consent, rather than just evidence of having second thoughts.]
In this era of feminism and equality, why are we demanding that men take better care of us than we do, respect us more than we do and use more common sense than we do?
I am released of any responsibility for my physical actions as soon as my mouth says no. A man must be in complete control of his body at all times. I can act like the worst kind of skanky slut, but he must be a gentleman or go to jail.
Look, I believe that no ought to mean no. But you ought to know as well as I do that as women, we screw with this rule all the time. "Why no dear, you don't need to make a fuss over my birthday." What's wrong? "Nothing." And women do say "No" when they mean no, but some also say no and mean maybe.
We are only going to make this problem worse if we insist to our young women that they need make no provisions at all for their own safety. Hey, baby just say "I'm not sure about this" as you ALLOW him to take of your clothes after you've kissed and petted and gotten drunk, and you're home free. It's all HIS fault.
So, not only do men have to be able to determine whether no means "persuade me", but they have to rely upon our body language as well? So, if I SAY no, but rub my naked body all over him, should I feel raped if he goes ahead?
Going ahead would be wrong, but it would also be eminently understandable.
Rape isn't a matter of common sense, it's a violent crime.
I am released of any responsibility for my physical actions as soon as my mouth says no. A man must be in complete control of his body at all times. I can act like the worst kind of skanky slut, but he must be a gentleman or go to jail.
Some men might think that a woman winking at them or wearing a low-cut shirt is a woman "acting like a skanky slut" - and yes if he rapes her he should be locked up in a prison like the animal he is. And yes, a man should be "in complete control" over his body at all times, aren't you?
Look, I believe that no ought to mean no. But you ought to know as well as I do that as women, we screw with this rule all the time. "Why no dear, you don't need to make a fuss over my birthday." What's wrong? "Nothing." And women do say "No" when they mean no, but some also say no and mean maybe.
Ummm, no actually I don't "screw with this rule all of the time" - if you do then maybe you are part of the problem - don't confuse your actions and/or behavior with that of others.
We are only going to make this problem worse if we insist to our young women that they need make no provisions at all for their own safety.
I do think women need to be careful and think of their safety because there are many nutso people out there....that doesn't mean I excuse the nutso people.
Hey, baby just say "I'm not sure about this" as you ALLOW him to take of your clothes after you've kissed and petted and gotten drunk, and you're home free. It's all HIS fault.
Strippers take their clothes off for men all of the time and give them lap dances - they aren't giving the okay for every man in the bar to rape them. And do really think every virgin bride-to-be has never taken her shirt off while alone with her man....and if she does, are you saying she 'deserves' to be raped? I sincerely hope not.
Ummm, pushing them away should be a clue....so yes.
So, if I SAY no, but rub my naked body all over him, should I feel raped if he goes ahead?
You most certainly should and you would. I don't care if you ran out into the street naked, nobody has the right to violate your body.
Going ahead would be wrong, but it would also be eminently understandable.
If you really feel this way, all I can say is....you have issues, Dianna.
Truer word have never been spoken (or in this case, written). The kid's defense should have been, "I just did what Bill Clinton does all the time!
A woman who is physically capable of making non-consent clear has a responsibility to do so in any case where she has previously given consent. The original article suggested that the girl had failed to make her non-consent unmistakably clear. Post #129 rebutted that, and suggested circumstances which should reasonably be defined as rape [among other things, she used the "N" word which--for whatever reason--the minority judge ignored].
The "law" is grotesquely bigoted againt males. Go to most "family" or divorce courts to find out how utterly corrupt the system has become. One of the great untapped sources of rage against liberals is the horrific treatment males get from leftest lawyers and judges. Where are the spokespersons for males? How could the California Supremes be so patently evil?
Oh, unless you are a leading democrat. In which case you can rape and sexually abuse women at will. Think TRUE serial sexual predators Clinton, Kennedy (any), Dodd, Jesse Jackson, etc., ad nauseum.
Walkingfeather I get what you are trying to say but when a rape is occurring it is more akin to someone opening their wallet and letting the person have some money and then the person taking the money, well he starts getting crazy, his eyes bulge out and the generous person starts fearing the person taking the money may have a gun in their pocket - the generous person figures maybe they can talk themselves out of the situation without the person who is taking the money going more nutso - they figure that if they just scream and run with the wallet that the crazy man might do more than 'just' take their money, so they try to 'reason' with him first....can you imagine this type of situation? Have you ever run across someone strange and try to back away from them slowly because you feared any sudden moves might make them worse?
Okay, since you are so fond of "forthrightness" I guess I'll do the polite thing and respect your wishes and just say....!#@$ %^* @$#*^!#.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.