Me Too Champion showed it was him too

[GMDino]

If consent once equals consent always there would never be need for a safe word.

[fredtoast]

(05-11-2018, 02:38 PM)GMDino Wrote: If consent once equals consent always there would never be need for a safe word.

A "safe word" is a verbal revocation of consent.  It is like saying "no".  That is the way it is supposed to work after consent has been established by a course of conduct.  But that is not the way Bels and others say it should work.  They say it is rape even if the victim never says "no".

The more I look at it the more obvious it becomes that they are coming up with these silly rules that they admit they don't even follow themselves just to address one specific situation.....sex with a person who is unconscious.

All they have to do is say it is not okay to have sex with a person who is unconscious.  Instead they require that you have to get a "yes" before you touch your girlfriend and you even have to decide if she was "enthusiastic" when she said "yes" before you are allowed to do anything.

[fredtoast]

I guess I am more jaded about this issue than many of you because of my profession. As a criminal defense attorney I have seen multiple cases of women lying about consensual sex and claiming rape just because they were mad at their boyfriend/lover.

Rape cases are very complicated because both parties can agree that they had sex, then the question becomes "What was each person thinking when they had sex?"

The advocates against sexual assault and rape almost never consider the power they are giving women. They never even consider that a woman would get mad at a man and want to lie to get him in trouble, but it happens a lot. Sometimes it is not even them getting mad at the guy. Instead it is a fear that their parents will find out, or maybe a boyfriend will find out she had sex with another guy. Then consensual sex becomes rape. And even in cases where there is zero evidence of any force being used the guy could be in deep shit.

[*Nately120*]

(05-11-2018, 03:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I guess I am more jaded about this issue than many of you because of my profession.  As a criminal defense attorney I have seen multiple cases of women lying about consensual sex and claiming rape just because they were mad at their boyfriend/lover.

Rape cases are very complicated because both parties can agree that they had sex, then the question becomes "What was each person thinking when they had sex?"

The advocates against sexual assault and rape almost never consider the power they are giving women.  They never even consider that a woman would get mad at a man and want to lie to get him in trouble, but it happens a lot.  Sometimes it is not even them getting mad at the guy.  Instead it is a fear that their parents will find out, or maybe a boyfriend will find out she had sex with another guy.  Then consensual sex becomes rape. And even in cases where there is zero evidence of any force being used the guy could be in deep shit.

Yeah, but crazy women are so good in bed.  Life is cruel.

[Belsnickel]

(05-11-2018, 12:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So what if a guy uses this a defense when his girlfriend cries rape?

"My girlfriend and I have had consensual sex a lot of times so I know what consent looks like.  Therefore I don't need to ask permission every time."

Would that be considered a legitimate defense?

You would have to unpack what their conversations have been around consent.

(05-11-2018, 12:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And have you ever had sex with your wife when you had both been drinking?  Or should I say, have you ever raped your wife when you had both been drinking?

You are trying to enforce rules that you admit you don't follow.  This is nothing like a straw man.  This is the exact same thing.

To your question: no.

And these are rules I do follow. We know what consent looks like with each other. We've had those conversations. Benton is right in that consent in a relationship is a complicated thing but it is something you have to have communication about it.

You are definitely trying to build a straw man.

(05-11-2018, 02:24 PM)Benton Wrote: In an academic setting or in regard to teens/kids/young adults, I think that's a plausible standard. As someone with kids, I'm happy that's the standard.

For the other five billion people on the planet, that's probably never going to work. If sobriety and enthusiasm are the benchmarks for consensual sex, I couldn't recall the last time I had consensual sex during the last 14 years of marriage. I'm sure there were times either she or I hadn't had a drink and both were enthusiastic about it. 

This is why I have said that in a relationship there should be communication about what consent looks like.

(05-11-2018, 02:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If both parties are drunk and they have sex are they BOTH guilty of rape?

There is no way you could just charge one of them is there?

If both parties are intoxicated and we have evidence to that point, then we won't charge either one, or if one was charged we would find the accused student to be not responsible for a violation of policy. Part of the definition of consent requires the person knows or should have (reasonable person test) the other party was intoxicated. Even if a student was not intoxicated and they had sex with a person that feels they were too intoxicated to give consent, if there is insufficient evidence the accused student could've known then we won't find them responsible.

(05-11-2018, 02:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Are college women held to the same standard of getting a "sober and enthusiastic 'yes' " for consent before sex to avoid rape charges?

Yes. I have recommended expulsion for a female student before for sexual assault.

[Belsnickel]

(05-11-2018, 03:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I guess I am more jaded about this issue than many of you because of my profession. As a criminal defense attorney I have seen multiple cases of women lying about consensual sex and claiming rape just because they were mad at their boyfriend/lover.

Rape cases are very complicated because both parties can agree that they had sex, then the question becomes "What was each person thinking when they had sex?"

The advocates against sexual assault and rape almost never consider the power they are giving women. They never even consider that a woman would get mad at a man and want to lie to get him in trouble, but it happens a lot. Sometimes it is not even them getting mad at the guy. Instead it is a fear that their parents will find out, or maybe a boyfriend will find out she had sex with another guy. Then consensual sex becomes rape. And even in cases where there is zero evidence of any force being used the guy could be in deep shit.

I get what you're saying here, especially because I deal with sexual assault cases somewhat regularly. We had four cases this year that were reported and I sat on the three-person board for each one. I am not going to say here and say false reports don't happen, but the rate at which they happen is highly overblown. False rape accusations occur at a rate similar to other violent crimes, but you wouldn't know that based on the way people talk about it.

Even with preponderance being our level of evidence, we are very strict on procedures and evidence in our proceedings because this is such a serious situation. We're currently dealing with a female student who is unhappy with the outcome of the case putting the university on blast because we found her attacker not responsible. I was on the board, and in truth I believe sexual assault took place. But the evidence wasn't there to support it and so I can't justify suspending or expelling him because my gut says he is a raping douchebag.

I get that this is a touchy subject, often because when people look at this topic from the viewpoint I am coming from it can make you feel a little uncomfortable. We could probably all look at these standards and see interactions we've had as non-consensual. That isn't a good feeling. But maybe that highlights how we need to improve the conversation around this topic.

[*bfine32*]

If a female has given me consent in the past and I have sex with her while unconscious is that OK?

As to the whole consent back and forth I do not see how it is relevant to this topic as the women clearly said no consent was given.

[fredtoast]

(05-11-2018, 03:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote:  when people look at this topic from the viewpoint I am coming from it can make you feel a little uncomfortable.

Actually it does not just make me feel uncomfortable.  It makes me very scared.  Especially when you make comments like this...

(05-11-2018, 03:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote:  I believe sexual assault took place. But the evidence wasn't there to support it 

You are a perfect example of the problem I was talking about earlier.  You don't believe in false claims because you believe rape occurred when there is no evidence to support it.

[fredtoast]

(05-11-2018, 03:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If a female has given me consent in the past and  I have sex with her while unconscious is that OK?

No.

(05-11-2018, 03:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to the whole consent back and forth I do not see how it is relevant to this topic as the women clearly said no consent was given.

We kind of got sidetracked from the original facts, but did they ever say "no" to anything?  That is the issue.  We all agree that "no" means "no", but can silence mean "no" when prior consent has been established by a course of conduct.

If you are in a relationship with a guy who like rough sex you are always allowed to say no.  But my position is that you can't be silent, engage in rough sex, and then claim it was not consensual.

[Belsnickel]

(05-11-2018, 03:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually it does not just make me feel uncomfortable.  It makes me very scared.  Especially when you make comments like this...


You are a perfect example of the problem I was talking about earlier.  You don't believe in false claims because you believe rape occurred when there is no evidence to support it.

You really do like a straw man. I didn't say no evidence, there was evidence, but so much was "he said she said" that there wasn't proponderance. I also never said I don't believe in false claims.

[*bfine32*]

(05-11-2018, 03:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.


We kind of got sidetracked from the original facts, but did they ever say "no" to anything?  That is the issue.  We all agree that "no" means "no", but can silence mean "no" when prior consent has been established by a course of conduct.

If you are in a relationship with a guy who like rough sex you are always allowed to say no.  But my position is that you can't be silent, engage in rough sex, and then claim it was not consensual.

We can go by the word of the women who state no consent was provided and they state no consent was given and what happened to them was assault.

Not sure about dude in the OP, but I can usually detect whether my partner is into the act or not.

Or we can assume the women are lying.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-11-2018, 03:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If a female has given me consent in the past and  I have sex with her while unconscious is that OK?

How can you have sex with someone if you're unconcious?

[GMDino]

(05-11-2018, 04:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: We can go by the word of the women who state no consent was provided and they state no consent was given and what happened to them was assault.

Not sure about dude in the OP, but I can usually detect whether my partner is into the act or not.

Or we can assume the women are lying.

What about the word of the accused?

Or does that only count in some cases and not others?

We could assume a lot. 

[*bfine32*]

(05-11-2018, 04:04 PM)PhilHos Wrote: How can you have sex with someone if you're unconcious?

Viagra

[*bfine32*]

(05-11-2018, 04:09 PM)GMDino Wrote: What about the word of the accused?

Or does that only count in some cases and not others?

We could assume a lot. 

Sure we should consider the words of the accused. Do you have any you care to share with the class?

[fredtoast]

(05-11-2018, 04:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure we should consider the words of the accused. Do you have any you care to share with the class?

"In the privacy of intimate relationships, I have engaged in role-playing and other consensual sexual activity. I have not assaulted anyone. I have never engaged in non-consensual sex, which is a line I would not cross."



You'll never guess where I found these.

[GMDino]

(05-11-2018, 04:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure we should consider the words of the accused. Do you have any you care to share with the class?

Quote:“It’s been my great honor and privilege to serve as attorney general for the people of the State of New York,” Mr. Schneiderman said in a statement. “In the last several hours, serious allegations, which I strongly contest, have been made against me.

“While these allegations are unrelated to my professional conduct or the operations of the office, they will effectively prevent me from leading the office’s work at this critical time. I therefore resign my office, effective at the close of business on May 8, 2018.”

....

Mr. Schneiderman, 63, denied abusing the women, saying in a statement: “In the privacy of intimate relationships, I have engaged in role-playing and other consensual sexual activity. I have not assaulted anyone. I have never engaged in nonconsensual sex, which is a line I would not cross.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/nyregion/new-york-attorney-general-eric-schneiderman-abuse.html

Is he lying?  I do not know.

A wide, moral compass once said we should not pass judgement on things and people until we know all the facts.

That may have just been about things he cared about or believed in.  I suppose.

[GMDino]

(05-11-2018, 04:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: "In the privacy of intimate relationships, I have engaged in role-playing and other consensual sexual activity. I have not assaulted anyone. I have never engaged in non-consensual sex, which is a line I would not cross."



You'll never guess where I found these.

To be fair once being "consistent" seems to be all that is important.

[*bfine32*]

(05-11-2018, 04:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: "In the privacy of intimate relationships, I have engaged in role-playing and other consensual sexual activity. I have not assaulted anyone. I have never engaged in non-consensual sex, which is a line I would not cross."



You'll never guess where I found these.

I'm assuming they are in the OP Dino. You know, the post where I quoted the points I wanted to address.

And if you read those words I'm not sure it's a denial. He did say he didn't engage in non-consensual sex.

Someone's lying I guess the next step would be to determine what motivation each party would have to do so.

[*bfine32*]

(05-11-2018, 04:30 PM)GMDino Wrote:  

A wide, moral compass once said we should not pass judgement on things and people until we know all the facts.

Sounds like you received sage advise from someone. Now it's your choice to follow it or not.