|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: War On Drugs | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
So a woman could finally be taken seriously when she went to the police and told them that she was fooling around with a guy on a date but then he raped her. Please explain how this necessitated, or was made more understandable by coining the term "date rape", rather than simply making public arguments that women who are in the situation above are "raped"... just plain "raped." In fact I would argue that creating the new definition actually makes people take rape less seriously in general, rather than making rapes by partners more serious.
Are you seriously suggesting that the scenario above is not significantly different from a rape in which a woman walking home from the bus station is dragged into the bushes and raped by a stranger? If they are different, that seems to argue against your position. While I think the environment is different, the mechanics are the same. It is a forced sexual situation, brought about by overt or implied violence. If you are trying to argue for rape to extend to nonforced situations, then I want to see a good argument for that. This message has been edited by holmes, 03-22-2005 09:47 AM holmes "...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: I agree that there are downsides to using such terminology, but you are discounting the benefits out of hand, I think. People have been raped on dates. That this happens is a fact. It is also a fact that it used to be thought that if there was any kind of sexual or romantic physical contact during the date before the rape, law enforcement would be much less likely to take allegations of rape seriously. This is similar to the notion that prostitutes can't be raped, or that if a woman dresses in sexy or revealing clothing, she is "asking for it".
quote: 1) I don't see how I have diluted the term. Yes, some people misuse it, just like some people misuse lots of othjer terms. The issues and circumstances involved with a rape by someone trused or by a complete stranger are different. 2)This is from a the American Academy of Pediatrics survey:
In a survey of college males 43% of college-aged men admitted to using coercive behavior to have sex, including ignoring a woman's protest, using physical aggression, and forcing intercourse, but did not admit that it was rape. 15% acknowledged they had committed acquaintance rape; 11% acknowledged using physical restraints to force a woman to have sex. My point in listing this stat is that a sizeable minority of the men surveyed above were using coersion and/or physical force or aggression to have sex but don't even consider it rape.
quote: The JD doesn't use the term "really common", I do.
stats Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. In 1995, 354,670 women were the victims of a rape or sexual assault. (NationalCrime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.) Over the last two years, more than 787,000 women were the victim of a rape or sexual assault. (National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.Department of Justice, 1996.) The FBI estimates that 72 of every 100,000 females in the United States wereraped last year. (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Statistics, 1996.) yet you were a victim. You are a survivor, too, but you were also a victim. The "US victim factory" didn't make you a victim of rape, your rapist did. quote: Right. That's waht I said.
quote: Uh, I think that they were all still victims of crimes, no matter if they consider themselves such or not. It's just a fact. Please don't confuse your distaste for the "victim culture" with the fact that people ARE victimized.
quote: Uh, a "survivor" is defined as "someone who survived". This makes you a survivor, and that is a fact. Your distaste with how the "victim culture" treats survivors does not erase the fact that you recovered after your assaults.
quote: But, didn't you just say that you were victimized and you survived? That makes them part of your past, thus part of who you are today. That doesn't mean you have to buy into the "victim culture" of forever feeling victimized and getting special pride and martyhood feelings about being a "survivor".
quote: Of course.
quote: But the past victimization and survival really did happen, right?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: BBC NEWS | UK | Girls reveal abuse by boyfriends Whats also clear of course is that boys are willing and able to exercise this violence. Our society still accepts violence by men against women; still seeks to demonise women as culpable for their victimhood. And it has to be massivley endemic if it is being taken up by kids in what is likely their first relationship. In this context, the idea that men "might" be aggressive, or "might" use a date-rape drug, is not hysterical, or demonising men, or an unfair generalisation, or any kind of "victim culture": it is simply acknowledging the actuality. This message has been edited by contracycle, 03-22-2005 10:52 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: I think it was made more understandable because now such actions, which were previously not considered rape at all, are now definitely considered rape. Look, I know a woman who, 20 years ago, was stranger raped when she was in high school and walking home. She was wearing her school uniform, which included a short skirt, and this was included in the defense's argument that she was "asking for it", and this was allowed by the legal system and the judge, and was instrumental in lessening the charge for her rapist. If this is the kind of treatment this girl got when she was stranger raped, what do you think would have happened to her if she went to the police saying that her boyfriend raped her after they were fooling around? If it is the prevalent cultural attitude among men that "women ask for it", and "I'm entitled to sex if I've paid for dinner/ am married to the woman", and nearly all law enforcement officers are male, how do you think they are going to treat such incidences? As rape? not likely, unless we define it specifically as such.
quote: I disagree. I think it is simply a way to describe, rightfully, a type of rape that was previously unrecognized by law enforcement and indeed, many males in our culture, as real rape. This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-22-2005 11:15 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
quote: What on earth does that actually mean? I damn well expect any girlfriend of mine to act in an aggressive way if she found out I was cheating on her.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4156 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
and what any of this has to do with the "war on drugs"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
I agree that there are downsides to using such terminology, but you are discounting the benefits out of hand, I think. I would argue I am not discounting the benefits out of hand, because I am relating the very experiences which lead me to believe it lacks merit. Lets review: Definition: Rape is the use of force, overt or implied violence (as well as intentionally usurping a person's will through drugging because resistance is expected), in order to use a person sexually (though the more important aspect is gaining control and/or humiliation). Problem: The stereotype of rape does not match its actual demographic nature. It is less caused by strangers then by aquaintances, and in part this is reinforced by social attitudes regarding forced sex within relationships. Proposed Solution #1: Use new terms which add the relationship of the perp-victim to the original term. Proposed Solution #2: Get the message out that our stereotypes of how rape occurs does not match demographics, and explain (through examples) that our definitions of rape can apply to various relationships between perp-victim. I honestly do not see how #1 has any additional benefits than #2, and I have certainly seen the downside which #2 does not have.
2)This is from a the American Academy of Pediatrics survey: "In a survey of college males 43% of college-aged men admitted to using coercive behavior to have sex, including ignoring a woman's protest, using physical aggression, and forcing intercourse, but did not admit that it was rape. 15% acknowledged they had committed acquaintance rape; 11% acknowledged using physical restraints to force a woman to have sex." My point in listing this stat is that a sizeable minority of the men surveyed above were using coersion and/or physical force or aggression to have sex but don't even consider it rape. First of all I do not believe that study was valid. It sounds a bit ludicrous to me, but for sake of argument (and since I don't have it to look at) I will assume it is completely accurate. Rather than seeing that a sizable amount of men use force, or are willing to use some form of coercion and don't consider it rape, perhaps you should be noting that you just provided evidence for exactly what I was talking about. For those that did admit to rape, they admitted to "aquaintance rape" category. Could that be because they view that as different, and lesser than rape? It'd be interesting to see that same study involve perceptions of one version of rape vs another. But we can even ignore that. What does it show regarding how new terminology would effect their behavior?
The JD doesn't use the term "really common", I do. "The FBI estimates that 72 of every 100,000 females in the United States wereraped last year. (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Statistics, 1996.)" 72 out of 100,000 during one year is "really common" to you? Honestly? I view that as extremely uncommon. If 72 out of 100,000 abortions ended in a death of the woman, would you consider the charge that maternal death from abortion is "really common"?
Please don't confuse your distaste for the "victim culture" with the fact that people ARE victimized. This is a semantics issue to some degree, so let me try and explain. Yes, people can be victimized. I was a victim. The victim culture involves consistently identifying people based on whether they have been, are now, or may be a victim. It is a way of looking at the world where people are sorted into "Potential Victim" and "Actual Victim" categories. Once a victim, that is what is repeated as their condition and used to justify policies which the "victim" might have no interest in. Thus those involved in the WTC tragedy were victims, but their memories are extended as if that is all they were, and used to justify irrational actions in their name (like attacking Iraq). Suddenly the numerical victims can be revictimized by a political oppressor. What's worse, the status of "victim" becomes somewhat sacred and weak people will capitalize on this notion. We need less victims.
This makes you a survivor, and that is a fact. Your distaste with how the "victim culture" treats survivors does not erase the fact that you recovered after your assaults. Just one assault to be clear. In any case, despite being a "victim" I pretty much reject the "survivor" label. Once we get to the point of saying when one has been treated badly by someone one has been a victim and if you have overcome the emotional trauma one is a survivor, then we have diluted those terms to nothing. In that case we are all victims and survivors. I think that is an unhealthy way of looking at the world. I did have some trauma and dealt with it. I have had much worse traumas, including completely nonsexual ones (though they generally involved deception/force/violence). That does not mean I "survived" or should be identified as a "survivor" Indeed if I went through my other, much worse, traumas I am sure some would trigger you to wonder why I took it so badly and definitely not list me as a survivor... even if I had been victimized. Some rape victims would be properly classified as survivors depending on the nature of their ordeal. I would not begin to put my case in with theirs. I am glad I did not go through an intense violent ordeal with grave physical damage.
That makes them part of your past, thus part of who you are today. Yes, but not much. Thankfully I was openminded about sex in general so I wasn't as upset as I could have been (a homophobe would have had to have come out of that much worse for the wear). It was degrading and humiliating and painful. It was traumatic and I can remember that it was bad. However it does not haunt me, with the exception of when I see someone say society needs to do X, and then cites that event in my life as a reason why. That is not an argument at all, it is further victimization. Let's say you someone in school beat the hell out of you and took your lunch money. Would you say a person should still view themselves as a victim and a survivor? That is other than a nominal yes at one time I was victimized and got over the incident?
But the past victimization and survival really did happen, right? Yes, and I have drawn my own conclusions from my experiences. However others use stats of which I am a part, and then say they are working to defend "those people", which means me, and then completely reject what I have to say. And worse still, some will invent ways to be called victims in order to have their voices carry more weight... as if they are one of "those people." "Those people" generally have their own voices and can tell you what they think is needed to protect them in the future. Some cannot, that is true, but many can and it is degrading to use them to push any specific agenda. The merits of any legislation or other policy should stand or fall on its own. I still do not see the merits of adding "date" to "rape", and alluding to all of the cases of aquaintances raping people they know is not going to change that. holmes "...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Based on other stuff I have read, I would expect this to include physical intimidation, harrasment, bunny-boiling, stalking and so forth. Lets also bear in mind there are quite a number of cases of jilted men murdering their ex's, and sometimes their children, becuase "If I can't have you nobody can". Angry and emotional, I think of as normal. Aggressive, no.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
caligula Inactive Member |
jaja ! well,i think you know the answer to your proposition, besides, this is America....everybody's looking 4 an excuse to sue.
maybe not you, but i'm thinking about it all the time,just don't know what to sue for (not yet) cali If you like this topic tell all your friends about it,if you don't,keep your mouth shut.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024