|
|
Post by davedan on Nov 25, 2011 2:06:03 GMT -5
If you have sex with someone who says no, then it's rape. It doesn't matter if they were drunk, wearing short shorts, or flirting with you. I think the thing here is she says - she wore short shorts, flirted with and was drunk but nowhere does she say she said no. I mean if she said "NO" then presumably her rapist actually knows he's a rapist. So I think the criticism is how her Rapist doesn't know he's a rapist. |
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Nov 25, 2011 2:08:31 GMT -5
If you have sex with someone who says no, then it's rape. It doesn't matter if they were drunk, wearing short shorts, or flirting with you. I think the thing here is she says - she wore short shorts, flirted with and was drunk but nowhere does she say she said no. I mean if she said "NO" then presumably her rapist actually knows he's a rapist. So I think the criticism is how her Rapist doesn't know he's a rapist. It doesn't say she said "yes," either. She was drunk, which might have hindered her ability to say no. |
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Nov 25, 2011 2:15:15 GMT -5
Even if you're drunk and say yes that's hardly consent. (I'm aware people probably know this already)
|
|
|
|
Post by davedan on Nov 25, 2011 8:29:22 GMT -5
Yeah but if you're both drunk and you both say yes, who raped who.
The point I'm making is that her rapist not knowing he's a rapist - well why is that is it culture?
I'm not saying she's wrong from what she said she easily could have been passed out and then he had sex with her not knowing he's a rapist when he was.
Unfortunately protest signs really aren't a medium for nuanced discussion. My only point is that the only way he could not know he's a rapist is if she didn't say No. Otherwise he would know he was a rapist.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Nov 25, 2011 8:33:20 GMT -5
I don't think that's the point she's trying to make. :/
|
|
|
|
Post by davedan on Nov 25, 2011 8:41:46 GMT -5
No but that is where the criticism is coming from. She is blaming a 'rape culture' and the 'rape culture' is meant to be such that her rapist doesn't know he's a rapist. I think there would be less criticism and the sign would be more effective if it said he doesn't 'think' rather than 'know' he's a rapist.
See the thing is, if he doesn't know he's a rapist he's going to go through life thinking he had consensual sex. That's where the criticism is coming from too. I mean if it was the case that she said no -then it would seem to me that he would KNOW he's a rapist.
That is what I think the criticism is about. The whole drunk thing just means that drunk people can't have sex, then how are ugly people ever going to get sex huh?
|
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Nov 25, 2011 12:50:35 GMT -5
Yeah but if you're both drunk and you both say yes, who raped who. They both raped each other, I guess.  |
|
|
|
Post by lexikon on Nov 25, 2011 13:40:17 GMT -5
Even if you're drunk and say yes that's hardly consent. (I'm aware people probably know this already) If you don't know alcohol lowers your inhibitions, you shouldn't be drinking it. But the sign didn't say she was drunk, just that she drank. Under the rape culture I suppose, "no" isn't a good enough answer and is just a tease. So it's possible that the person would think it is consensual when she said no based on the flirting and clothes, although I'm not sure if we reached that point of idiocy yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Nov 25, 2011 13:59:00 GMT -5
...The whole point is that rape culture has a big victim-blaming thing going on, where they will find ANY excuse to indicate that the woman was somehow asking for it (slightly revealing clothes, half a beer, blinking at someone could be interpreted as flirting) and then use that to say "well, she wasn't really raped."
So society told her rapist that he wasn't really a rapist. And that's the point of the sign.
I'm not quite sure what was so hard to get about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by lexikon on Nov 25, 2011 14:08:27 GMT -5
Well, if society has actually sunk that low and managed to convince people they aren't really rapists... we're screwed.
Essentially Dave said that the only way the rapist couldn't have known he was a rapist was if she didn't say "no" but like you said there are other excuses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tenfold_Maquette on Nov 25, 2011 15:12:32 GMT -5
Fuck that. If someone can't display the basic concern for how their actions impact others (like, y'know, not mindlessly fucking a warm hole just because it happens to be there) then they need to exit the damned gene pool already. Society shouldn't have to "teach" people that other people have rights to the control and use of their own body; if someone can't figure that out on their own, they need to GTFO my reality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Nov 25, 2011 15:23:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Nov 25, 2011 15:41:44 GMT -5
Side fact, she lost her job for that. |
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Nov 25, 2011 15:48:58 GMT -5
I bet it was because of the poor centering job on that poster. Maybe next time she tries to challenge a corrupt, entrenched power structure dedicated to the creation of a permanent underclass composed of 99% of the nation, she'll pay a little more attention to her margins and let the wealthy pay attention to theirs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Nov 25, 2011 15:56:53 GMT -5
I bet it was because of the poor centering job on that poster. Maybe next time she tries to challenge a corrupt, entrenched power structure dedicated to the creation of a permanent underclass composed of 99% of the nation, she'll pay a little more attention to her margins and let the wealthy pay attention to theirs. That's exactly what happened, look at this. |
|
