# Enough from the defenders of rapists already **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 23, 2014, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392 "2014-11-23T05:26:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 35
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/681 "2014-12-18T22:51:06Z")
Possibly the second most unbelievable conversation I’ve participated in at the Dope. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/682 "2014-12-18T22:53:20Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It is just as likely as anything else, when discussing consent. Consent one time doesn’t mean that consent another time is more or less likely. That’s absurd. Of all of the people you come into contact with, how many do you become consensual sexual partners with? It must be far less than 1%. That first consensual encounter shows that you have passed the hurdles of: 1) attraction, 2) opportunity, 3) right time in your life, 4) no other partners (or ones that know about it), etc. etc. There are hundreds of things that go into the equation before most consensual sexual encounters happen. Most of those things will still be present when the next opportunity for a sexual encounter with that person happens. Then say the attraction is so much that we get married, live together, and have sex on a (semi) regular basis; consent all around. You are seriously saying that my wife is no more or less likely to consent to the next proposition of sex than a random stranger on the street? Not even a percentage point? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/683 "2014-12-18T22:57:57Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > **jtgain** , a sum of money is going to leave your possession soon. It will either be because you spend it, or because I knock you down and take it. It will be either commerce or a mugging. > > If you report being mugged, should the police investigate how many voluntary purchases you made throughout the week? No, but it’s fairly obvious that people engage in commercial transactions. iiandyiiii’s argument is completely specious. Everyone agrees that there were X sex acts, and the question is if those X sex acts were consensual or not. Both sides agree that there weren’t any other sex acts. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/684 "2014-12-18T23:05:33Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This is just a variation on old-fashioned slut shaming. The myth that **some women can’t be raped** , because they always say yes. Old-school misogyny. (bolding mine) I guess all of the disclaimers didn’t work, huh? YES, FUCKING YES, PROSTITUTES CAN BE RAPED. Haven’t I said it enough? This is bullshit dishonest arguing and you know it. Nobody in this thread has made that statement. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/685 "2014-12-18T23:10:18Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > That first consensual encounter shows that you have passed the hurdles of: 1) attraction, 2) opportunity, 3) right time in your life, 4) no other partners (or ones that know about it), etc. etc. There are hundreds of things that go into the equation before most consensual sexual encounters happen. Most of those things will still be present when the next opportunity for a sexual encounter with that person happens. The most important thing is “does the woman want to have sex at this moment”. As most people who have been in relationships know, whether or not they had sex before doesn’t mean this particular characteristic will be more or less likely at a given moment. > [@](#): > > You are seriously saying that my wife is no more or less likely to consent to the next proposition of sex than a random stranger on the street? Not even a percentage point? No, that’s not at all what I’m saying. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/686 "2014-12-18T23:11:21Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > iiandyiiii’s argument is completely specious. Everyone agrees that there were X sex acts, and the question is if those X sex acts were consensual or not. Both sides agree that there weren’t any other sex acts. Huh? When did everyone agree on this? I don’t remember this part of the conversation at all. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/687 "2014-12-18T23:12:21Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > (bolding mine) I guess all of the disclaimers didn’t work, huh? YES, FUCKING YES, PROSTITUTES CAN BE RAPED. Haven’t I said it enough? This is bullshit dishonest arguing and you know it. Nobody in this thread has made that statement. I said it was a variation on an old theme – I didn’t say you said this. I accept that you understand that prostitutes can be raped. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/688 "2014-12-18T23:27:17Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > What places? Are there places with better discussions and emphasis on facts and evidence than the Dope? Depends on who you ask. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > No. Not all of the accusations are equal. But there’s nothing in Johnson’s account that doesn’t fit – **SA** ’s just wrong about that account. **SA** gave an OPINION. An opinion isn’t right or wrong unless you can show there are facts missing or some misunderstanding. If you’re both looking at the same facts and you can’t show a misunderstanding, your opinion isn’t better than his opinion just by virtue of you posting that. Before you (and others) claim that his opinion is inferior solely because it comes from him, I’ve read other people who have claimed similar opinions in different words. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > For one thing, there’d actually have to be a contradiction. OK, you can call it an inconsistency or an improbable circumstance or a logical disconnection. When does any of that become pertinent when looking at these stories? In my view, you’ve handwaved away several improbable circumstances without much explanation other than there could be other reasons for it. If you can use your imagination for how it could be innocuous on the accuser’s side, that same type of imaginative filling-in-the-blanks should be allowed for creating defenses for the accused. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I don’t know if it was hyperbole – it was one phrase, “completely limp”. She either felt that literally, momentarily, or she used it as a phrase that in common parlance would mean “I felt very weak and limp”. Either explanation is possible, and neither one makes the story weaker in any way – both would be “completely” normal uses in English. This is disingenuous. You brought up the idea of hyperbole. If you didn’t think it was hyperbole, you should not have used the word as you did. You used it several times, even after questioned about it to explain something away that you couldn’t explain away in another way. You used both the possibility of hyperbole or a momentary state. If you were sure it was a momentary state, you could have stated that. But that would have been a weaker argument. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Those aren’t inconsistencies. In that time period, reporting rapes were much more rare, and much more difficult for the victim. Where does she say she didn’t have “the confidence in herself to think her story was important”? That’s how I read [this](http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/11/showbiz/celebrity-news-gossip/beverly-johnson-cosby-allegations/index.html): > [@](#): > > “For a long time I thought it was something that only happened to me, and that I was somehow responsible. So I kept my secret to myself, believing this truth needed to remain in the darkness,” she writes > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren’t. Sex with a intoxicated victim who didn’t consent is rape whether or not she yells “stop”. At what point is a victim too intoxicated to consent? That’s not a rhetorical question. I think it was asked earlier in the thread. If someone has had a couple drinks (or one drink), can they claim rape even if they didn’t object while the act was happening? I’m willing to be educated on this issue. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There were no distortions of the truth – it was a normal use in English. See above. It was your use of the word hyperbole that brought the idea of distortions of truth into the discussion. I wasn’t claiming there were distortions of truth. I was saying that hyperbole can be used to distort the truth. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Nothing in Johnson’s story fits any of these concerns. Maybe there are reasonable things to think that don’t fit in some of the stories – but Johnson’s account doesn’t qualify. Because you said so, despite other people disagreeing? You’re not making an argument. You’re just stating your opinion as fact. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Having a motivation to tell her story doesn’t make it any less likely to be true. I already posted that in the quote you’re responding to. Either you’re not reading what I’m posting and/or you’re just responding with canned answers to what you think I’m posting. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > In my view you’re full of shit on this. There are no reasonable concerns of these sorts with Johnson’s story. That doesn’t mean it’s true – maybe she’s a great liar and storyteller. But these “concerns” are nitpicks and not reasonable points of challenging her story. You’re restating your opinion. It’s your opinion that the points of challenge are not reasonable. Some people disagree. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/689 "2014-12-18T23:29:06Z")
But we are proceeding on the assumption that sex happened. We are now trying to determine if that sex was consensual. We have no independent evidence other that “he said, she said” You are saying that it is unimportant, and even irrelevant, that the purported victim is: 1. A nun. 2. My wife. 3. A complete stranger 4. A 100 year old woman. 5. A prostitute. ? Yes. There are times when each of 1-5 would maybe like to have sex and times when they would rather not. Some of those would not like to have sex with me at all. But just so I understand your contention, the question of rape/not-rape in your mind is equally likely given a specific situation where sex occurred, no matter if the person is 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. If you are trying to make another point, then we are talking past each other here because we are trying to do what I stated. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/690 "2014-12-18T23:45:32Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > **SA** gave an OPINION. An opinion isn’t right or wrong unless you can show there are facts missing or some misunderstanding. If you’re both looking at the same facts and you can’t show a misunderstanding, your opinion isn’t better than his opinion just by virtue of you posting that. Obviously. And I’m free to challenge, criticize, and mock his opinion, because it’s a very foolish one. > [@](#): > > Before you (and others) claim that his opinion is inferior solely because it comes from him, I’ve read other people who have claimed similar opinions in different words. I don’t think it’s foolish because it comes from him – I think the content of the opinion is foolish. > [@](#): > > OK, you can call it an inconsistency or an improbable circumstance or a logical disconnection. When does any of that become pertinent when looking at these stories? When an actual inconsistency, improbability, or disconnection is pointed out. > [@](#): > > In my view, you’ve handwaved away several improbable circumstances without much explanation other than there could be other reasons for it. If you can use your imagination for how it could be innocuous on the accuser’s side, that same type of imaginative filling-in-the-blanks should be allowed for creating defenses for the accused. If you want to go into more depth, point out the things you think improbable. > [@](#): > > This is disingenuous. You brought up the idea of hyperbole. If you didn’t think it was hyperbole, you should not have used the word as you did. What I described (one possibility) is hyperbole. Using “completely limp” to mean “extremely weak and limp” is hyperbole, and a totally normal use of the word. > [@](#): > > At what point is a victim too intoxicated to consent? This would probably fit a whole different thread. The intoxication level probably depends on the individual. > [@](#): > > It was your use of the word hyperbole that brought the idea of distortions of truth into the discussion. I wasn’t claiming there were distortions of truth. I was saying that hyperbole can be used to distort the truth. Hyperbole can be used to distort the truth, but I see no reason to believe it was here. If she used hyperbole, she used a very common and not dishonest form of hyperbole. “Completely” meaning “very” or “extremely” is very common… imagine “I was completely worn out after work…” or “I was completely drunk…”, etc. > [@](#): > > Because you said so, despite other people disagreeing? You’re not making an argument. You’re just stating your opinion as fact. No, it’s just my opinion. If you want to argue, feel free. > [@](#): > > You’re restating your opinion. It’s your opinion that the points of challenge are not reasonable. Some people disagree. If you want to argue on the points, feel free. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/691 "2014-12-18T23:49:06Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > But we are proceeding on the assumption that sex happened. Do we know how many times? Do we know over what period? This tells us very little – most people have sex. > [@](#): > > We are now trying to determine if that sex was consensual. We have no independent evidence other that “he said, she said” > > You are saying that it is unimportant, and even irrelevant, that the purported victim is: > > 1. A nun. > 2. My wife. > 3. A complete stranger > 4. A 100 year old woman. > 5. A prostitute. > > ? > > Yes. There are times when each of 1-5 would maybe like to have sex and times when they would rather not. Some of those would not like to have sex with me at all. But just so I understand your contention, the question of rape/not-rape in your mind is equally likely given a specific situation where sex occurred, no matter if the person is 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. The question of whether I am more or less likely to believe a woman who says she was raped has nothing to do with her profession, her age, whether she’s a stranger or not – it’s only based on my judgment on her honesty. If I have reason to believe someone has been dishonest in the past, I’m less likely to believe her, but this has nothing to do with profession/age/etc., or even past drug use and past criminal activity, unless this drug use/criminal activity is very recent or ongoing. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/692 "2014-12-18T23:54:11Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Huh? When did everyone agree on this? I don’t remember this part of the conversation at all. It’s implicit in the hypothetical situation. Every rape accusation involves a certain number of specified number of rape acts. Generally one, but no matter. Whatever the number is, the defendent is claiming that that number of sex acts were all consensual. In the typical situation the accuser and the accused are both agreeing about the number of sex acts and the question is solely of whether those acts were voluntary or coerced. The notion that there are some unspecified number out there and the accuser and accused are referencing completely different acts is not a part of the typical scenario (or any story I’ve every heard of) and seems like a dodge by you. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2014, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/693 "2014-12-18T23:56:52Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It’s implicit in the hypothetical situation. > > Every rape accusation involves a certain number of specified number of rape acts. Generally one, but no matter. Whatever the number is, the defendent is claiming that that number of sex acts were all consensual. > > In the typical situation the accuser and the accused are both agreeing about the number of sex acts and the question is solely of whether those acts were voluntary or coerced. The notion that there are some unspecified number out there and the accuser and accused are referencing completely different acts is not a part of the typical scenario (or any story I’ve every heard of) and seems like a dodge by you. This doesn’t necessarily seem like the only sort of typical situation we’ve been discussing – I’ve read about many rape accusations in which consent wasn’t the only point of disagreement… the parties may have also disagreed on the number of times they had sex, and many other things. So no, I don’t believe this was anything implied in this discussion at all. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/694 "2014-12-19T00:01:48Z")
OK, fine, so I assume then that you would agree in a case that I’m suggesting. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/695 "2014-12-19T00:08:29Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Considering the things you frequently imagine, I don’t think anything you imagine about prostitutes is linked to reality. I was curious about the claim about prostitution and drug use. I looked it up after I read it. I found [this](http://alcoholrehab.com/drug-addiction/sexual-exploitation-and-substance-abuse/): > [@](#): > > Drug use is intrinsically linked to prostitution, especially street prostitution. Estimates suggest that between 40 and 85 per cent of all prostitutes are drug users. Many prostitutes, men and women, are selling sex to support their drug habits and are often the victim of sexual exploitation, violent crimes, rapes, assaults and other serious crimes but these are very often unreported crimes. along with [this study](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7143150) and [this study](http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ648437), all pointing to the idea that drug use is rampant in prostitution, more than the average population and more than other females who have committed crimes. If you want to point out other studies or point out contention with some facts attached, I’d be interested to see them. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/696 "2014-12-19T00:21:59Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Look Mr. White Knight Defender Social Justice Warrior Dude. The chicks aren’t going to lay you. They don’t want or need your help. You are a liability to the cause. Give it up, desperate needy boy. Look Dr. Evil, it isn’t about whether the chicks will lay me. It’s that evil people have no right to hand women drugs, tell them to relax and them rape them while they are unconscious. It’s my intent to be a liability to your cause. It’s okay with me if the ladies don’t give it up. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/697 "2014-12-19T00:31:25Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > I was curious about the claim about prostitution and drug use. I looked it up after I read it. > > I found [this](http://alcoholrehab.com/drug-addiction/sexual-exploitation-and-substance-abuse/): > > along with [this study](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7143150) and [this study](http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ648437), all pointing to the idea that drug use is rampant in prostitution, more than the average population and more than other females who have committed crimes. > > If you want to point out other studies or point out contention with some facts attached, I’d be interested to see them. It’s quite interesting that you point to a study that says that prostitutes are often rape victims. I don’t think this study provides any support for any assertions that prostitutes are less likely to be raped. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/698 "2014-12-19T00:42:28Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Do we know how many times? Do we know over what period? This tells us very little – most people have sex. > > The question of whether I am more or less likely to believe a woman who says she was raped has nothing to do with her profession, her age, whether she’s a stranger or not – it’s only based on my judgment on her honesty. If I have reason to believe someone has been dishonest in the past, I’m less likely to believe her, but this has nothing to do with profession/age/etc., or even past drug use and past criminal activity, unless this drug use/criminal activity is very recent or ongoing. This looks like one of those conversations where someone says they picked a card out of a deck and it was the jack of clubs and they say “Aha! There’s only a 1 in 52 chance you’d pick the jack of clubs. I don’t believe you because it’s so unlikely!” ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/699 "2014-12-19T01:21:44Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Obviously. And I’m free to challenge, criticize, and mock his opinion, because it’s a very foolish one. > > I don’t think it’s foolish because it comes from him – I think the content of the opinion is foolish. You haven’t said much about the content of the posts. Mostly you’re just denying any validity, making an insult against the poster and then claiming no one holds their claim so it must be invalid. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > When an actual inconsistency, improbability, or disconnection is pointed out. Any inconsistency that gets posted gets pretty much the same response from you. You say you don’t believe it and state it so it looks like it’s everyone’s opinion. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > If you want to go into more depth, point out the things you think improbable. I was asking at which point does an inconsistency become relevant. You’ve handwaved away every inconsistency as irrelevant or not really inconsistent. Are you saying that every story is 100% consistent? Or are you saying that all you’re willing to do is sit and watch other people point out inconsistencies while you bat them away saying they’re possible, either by hyperbole, poor memory, or because anything is possible. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > What I described (one possibility) is hyperbole. Using “completely limp” to mean “extremely weak and limp” is hyperbole, and a totally normal use of the word. You’re back to claiming hyperbole. I asked if you would be comfortable with people accusing others of serious crimes with hyperbole. You backtracked on the word hyperbole, but now you’re back on it. It’s not a big argument, but your going back and forth on the word is disingenuous. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This would probably fit a whole different thread. The intoxication level probably depends on the individual. OK, I’m willing to follow you to another thread, but if you’re going to make the claim in this thread that it’s rape for intoxicated people to have sex without anyone saying “stop”, I want to know at what point that happens. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Hyperbole can be used to distort the truth, but I see no reason to believe it was here. If she used hyperbole, she used a very common and not dishonest form of hyperbole. “Completely” meaning “very” or “extremely” is very common… imagine “I was completely worn out after work…” or “I was completely drunk…”, etc. Common forms of hyperbole can still distort the truth. It can lead some people to question the veracity of the claim. Just because it didn’t lead you to that, it doesn’t follow that it’s unreasonable for others to have the same opinion. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > No, it’s just my opinion. If you want to argue, feel free. > > If you want to argue on the points, feel free. That’s the thing. You aren’t providing any points. You’re basically just denying anyone else’s points with an insult or mockery added. There’s not much to argue except that you’re doing that. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It’s quite interesting that you point to a study that says that prostitutes are often rape victims. I don’t think this study provides any support for any assertions that prostitutes are less likely to be raped. The quote you were responding to didn’t make that assertion, so it’s unsurprising that the study wouldn’t make that assertion. The quote you were responding to is here: > [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Of course she is. Prostitutes are overwhelmingly involved with drugs and as such are almost always deceptive and manipulative and desperate people. And by definition they are people because they earn their living outside the law, and the odds are good they lie to the families and friends about both their profession and their drug use. And I have no doubt they lie to their johns and to their pimps and to the police and to anyone else whenever they think it will benefit them in some way to do so. > > Certainly prostitutes can be raped. But I’d imagine that if you talked to most cops they’d tell you that more often than not whenever a prostitute claims she’s been raped, what really happened was that the guy either didn’t pay her or ripped her off for her money or drugs. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392/700 "2014-12-19T12:23:27Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > You haven’t said much about the content of the posts. Mostly you’re just denying any validity, making an insult against the poster and then claiming no one holds their claim so it must be invalid. No, I addressed each claim, several posts ago (and probably several pages before). If you think any of the assertions by Johnson are questionable, please specify and I’ll tell you what I think. > [@](#): > > Any inconsistency that gets posted gets pretty much the same response from you. You say you don’t believe it and state it so it looks like it’s everyone’s opinion. Nope. > [@](#): > > I was asking at which point does an inconsistency become relevant. You’ve handwaved away every inconsistency as irrelevant or not really inconsistent. Are you saying that every story is 100% consistent? Or are you saying that all you’re willing to do is sit and watch other people point out inconsistencies while you bat them away saying they’re possible, either by hyperbole, poor memory, or because anything is possible. I’m saying that none of the supposed inconsistencies pointed out in Johnson’s story were actually inconsistencies. There may well be inconsistencies in other stories. > [@](#): > > You’re back to claiming hyperbole. I always said hyperbole was a possibility. A totally normal and common type of hyperbole – using the word “completely” to mean “extremely”. > [@](#): > > I asked if you would be comfortable with people accusing others of serious crimes with hyperbole. You backtracked on the word hyperbole, but now you’re back on it. It’s not a big argument, but your going back and forth on the word is disingenuous. I didn’t go back and forth. I always said it might have been hyperbole. If you think I didn’t, please provide a cite in which I said “it’s not hyperbole”, or something very similar. If the hyperbole is of this type – “completely” being used to mean “extremely” (like “I was completely exhausted”), then it’s an entirely normal, reasonable, and trustworthy use of language. > [@](#): > > OK, I’m willing to follow you to another thread, but if you’re going to make the claim in this thread that it’s rape for intoxicated people to have sex without anyone saying “stop”, I want to know at what point that happens. Start a new thread if you want (it’s been discussed a lot before, I’m pretty sure). As to the specific point, it probably varies with each individual situation. If someone claims they were raped, their individual story and circumstance would have to be examined. Consent, as I understand it, is an unambiguous signal, whether in words or physical actions, that the sexual activity is desired and the partner wants to continue. > [@](#): > > Common forms of hyperbole can still distort the truth. Yes, but this one doesn’t. Are you really saying it’s distorting the truth to use “completely” like “extremely”? Have you never said “this completely wore me out…” or “I’m completely full…”, or “I’m completely satisfied…” etc.? > [@](#): > > It can lead some people to question the veracity of the claim. Just because it didn’t lead you to that, it doesn’t follow that it’s unreasonable for others to have the same opinion. It’s not reasonable in this case. Of course this is my opinion, and of course I think different opinions on this particular thing are unreasonable. How do you feel? Does the possibility of using “completely” to mean “extremely” cause you to question the veracity of a claim? > [@](#): > > That’s the thing. You aren’t providing any points. You’re basically just denying anyone else’s points with an insult or mockery added. There’s not much to argue except that you’re doing that. The argument happened several posts ago. You can dig it up, if you want. I directly challenged and criticized (and refuted, in my view) each one of **SA** ’s claims about Johnson’s story. Or you can bring up the actual points you think are worthy of discussion. > [@](#): > > The quote you were responding to didn’t make that assertion, so it’s unsurprising that the study wouldn’t make that assertion. The quote you were responding to is here: The quote I was responding to asserted (indirectly) that prostitutes are much less trustworthy when it comes to claims of rape. Your cite would indicate that prostitutes are frequent victims of rape, which would imply that such a claim by a prostitute would actually be pretty likely. I suppose it’s possible that prostitutes claim rape so often that they dilute these claims, but I’ve read no evidence that this is the case. Thus I believe it’s reasonable to treat a prostitute’s claim of rape the same as any other claim of rape, all other things being mostly equal. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392.md?page=34) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/enough-from-the-defenders-of-rapists-already/705392.md?page=36)