|
Marc2b -> RE: Name who you would like to rape on campus (12/19/2011 1:07:43 PM)
|
Some thoughts on the issue and various side issues.
(Note: I have read through most but not all of the posts on this thread.)
First, the dumb frat boys.
How fucking dumb and insensitive can you get? Yes, men generally go around looking at women and thinking to themselves “I’d fuck her.” I do it all the time myself, just driving around I’m looking and thinking “I’d fuck you, I’d fuck you, I’d fuck you, loose ten pounds and we’ll talk, I’d fuck you, who hasn’t fucked you, ditch the pig tails you’re not twelve anymore, I’d fuck you, I’d fuck you…”
I seriously doubt that I am alone in this. In fact, I rather suspect that the vast majority of men engage in similar behavior. I do not, however, verbalize these thoughts out loud. I do this for very simple reasons. First and foremost, because it would be fucking rude! If I may set aside humility for a moment, I have (after many fitful starts and false detours) reach a level of maturity where I recognize that most women, particularly strangers who have never met me and know nothing about me, would not care to hear my ideas about what they should do with their bodies for my personal pleasure. So, even though I’m might be thinking “awesome rack, and here comes the backside” as I hold a door open for a woman, I keep quiet except for a “you’re welcome” in response to the usual “thank you.” This is called civility. It is an important social skill and it is imperative that we teach these skills to succeeding generations.
There are certain situations where we can relax the rules of civility a bit. Mostly, when we are alone in a group of like minded individuals who are not complete strangers. There is nothing wrong with a bunch of guys sitting around a camp fire, chugging beers and saying, “hey, you know that cute redhead behind the counter at the convenience store? Man, I’d really like to fuck her.” Broadcasting it, however, would be an entirely different matter. The advent of the internet has created some incongruity in the matter. In some websites – CM is an excellent example – the civility is relaxed some. We are all, to some extent, at least acquaintances of each other and generally like minded as well (when it comes to kink, at least). I would never tell the cute, buxom, bank teller that I’d like to bend her over the counter and do her righteously. On the other hand I feel a more at liberty to tell some of the women here on CM just exactly what I’d like to do to them. Just as Ron feels free to tell them how much he wants them to give him a blow job. Numerous other examples could be cited. Because of the social context of the situation, there is the expectation that the comments will be understood as good natured joking with no expectation of actual harm – or desire to commit actual harm – implied (the flip side of that, of course, is that you’d better expect to be on the receiving end of such comments). The danger, of course, is that what we write here could easily be taken out of context and made to look quite different:
This is a breaking CBS news report. Presidential Candidate Ron’s campaign was dealt a severe blow today when it was revealed that he had spent time on-line demanding oral sex from women. Women’s groups condemned Ron for his sexism and insensitivity.
So what does this have to do with the dimbulb fraternity? Well, I don’t know any of these guys. I don’t know if they are serious threats to others. Regardless, I do know this. They have committed two serious faux pas. First was the use of the word “rape” which does imply a level of violence. Had, as others pointed out, they had simply used the word “fuck” this wouldn’t be half the story it is now. They are also idiots for not keeping such talk where it belonged (passing around a survey… how fucking stupid can you get). These guys are in deep for a lot of shit but my sympathy for them is limited… they brought this upon themselves.
These guys definitely need a lesson in proper civility. Presuming that this is nothing more than some “guy talk” getting out of hand, we should not, nor should we want to, ruin their lives over this but some sanctions need to be applied. Banning the Fraternity and/or expelling the students (or even jailing them for cripes sake) seems a bit over the top. A suspension of both seems more in order and perhaps some community service (say… scrubbing the toilets at the local Rape Crisis Center perhaps?). Something, in other words, that will teach them that what may be funny to them, is not necessarily funny to others and that they need to learn the valuable skill of discretion… if not out of genuine compassion, then out of a desire not to scrub toilets.
Second, should rape be gender neutral?
The question in terms of each individual crime is almost pointless. If a woman has been raped and she says that it was a man who raped her then obviously the investigation should focus on male suspects. I say almost pointless because if a woman has been raped and murdered then it is not pointless to presume that a man was most likely behind it. The “most likely,” however, is important. Good investigators don’t start an investigation presuming that it must be a certain profile of likely suspect. If they are intellectually honest and not swayed by personal bias (not an easy thing, admittedly) then they remain open (until evidence says otherwise) to all possibilities.
For example: A black man has been found beaten to death on the street. A nearby house is flying the nazi flag and has “KKK” and “Die, (racial expletive), Die” spray painted on the side. In this situation it would be perfectly legitimate for the investigators to start there. But they must still remain open to the possibility that the residents of the racist house had nothing to do with it. After all, they may have been down in the basement having a circle jerk while the crime was committed by someone else. Evidence for (the victims blood on the nazi assholes hands) or against (video tape of their circle jerk proving they were busy while the crime was committed) then takes the investigation one way or the other. A rape investigation (or an investigation for any other crime for that matter) should be no different.
The one area where I think gender should be irrelevant is in sentencing (after a conviction with due process). In fact I think all superficial differences should be irrelevant. If you are standing before a judge about to be sentenced for a crime it should not matter that either you or your victim are male or female, black or white, religious or atheist, young or old, etc, etc, etc. The only thing that matters is that you harmed a fellow human being and there is a penalty for that and the penalty should be the same for the same crimes. This is something we should all be equal in or else the phrase “equal before the law” is meaningless.
What is rape?
The simplest definition is penetration without consent. Some would include any sexual action without consent while others would label that “sexual assault.” Whether we are talking rape or sexual assault the key concept is consent. “Rape” in the context of a sexual fantasy obviously does not count. The term “rape fantasy” is itself an oxymoron. Whether it is in your head or you are acting it out with a willing partner, consent exists and therefore it is not rape. So go ahead and fantasize away may fellow kinkoids… just remember to have, and respect, a safe word (I prefer "Rumplestilskin," yeah I know it’s cliché but let’s be honest, how often does it come up in conversation?).
What about cases where one partner is intoxicated and the other is not? That clearly would be rape. An intoxicated person is not capable of making consent and the sober person has a responsibility to not take advantage of that. The same would be true if one partner was unconscious.
What if both partners are intoxicated? This one is a bit more difficult. Should we charge them both with rape? Would they not also both be rape victims? I suppose in that situation we might give them a choice. You can either both be charged with rape or you can both just write it off as a bad night and maybe give some thought to attending some AA meetings. Truth be told, if we make sex while both partners are intoxicated illegal, then a lot of sex would become illegal.
So what about the situation where the woman changes her mind mid coitus? First of all, I must ask, how often does this come up? I’m sure it has happened but I doubt that it is all that common. Generally speaking, if you’ve convinced a woman to take off her clothes and spread her legs for you, she’s probably going to see it through to the end. Still, when the situation does come up, what are the man’s responsibilities in the matter? I know that I’m perfectly capable of stopping mid coitus (it sucks, but I can do it). There have been times that I have had to (do you smell something burning? Holy shit! The pot roast is burning!). Hell, I’ve heard that President Clinton took some important calls while Monica was busy slurping away.
In all fairness, ladies, just as a car needs some distance to stop, a two or three thrusts stopping distance would be fair, particularly if we are near our peak.
Once orgasm has started, as far as I’m concerned, all bets for exerting control are off. I know it is not completely impossible (hell, I blew my nose once while in the middle of an orgasm) but it is difficult (I missed the tissue paper). The whole point of orgasm is to loose control.
As for morning after regrets, that is nonsense. If you have been happily consenting away before, during, and after coitus then there has been no rape. There is no such thing as retroactive rape.
The bottom line is this: Keep your sex talk within your circle of like minded friends and don’t fuck someone unless you know them well and know that they really want to fuck you.
And now, just to lighten things up a little, I present this fine example of crossing the lines of civility and the reactions to it.
|
|
|
|
