By 1980, 46 states had rape shield evidentiary laws in place; I’d say there’s not as much difference as you’re suggesting.
There’s an Air Force study that used similar criteria, and I’ll try to find a link tomorrow…
…but I’ve at least offered A study. Do you have any evidence at all to contradict it? A study that produced dissimilar numbers, for instance?
Oh, no, I don’t. To be honest, I’ve forgotten what part of the argument that was for, actually. Did someone say that false rape reports mean we shouldn’t call sexual assault rape? Or that calling date rape “rape” increases false rape reports? Sorry, it’s been a long day and I’m not reading all that well for comprehension right now. I think I’m going to turn in and see y’all in the morning. Hopefully my brain will reboot overnight.
Excuse me? I said impaired, not incapacitated.
False rape accusations are not uncommon. I didn’t bother providing cites because I thought the knowledge was commonplace.
Remember the Duke case? Here’s another false claim. And another. And another. I could go on.
Here’s a cite for 2%.
That article also addresses the 2% statistic and says that the FBI hold to 9%.
Man, those numbers are all over the place, aren’t they? 2%, 9%, 20%, “over 40%”…I guess the only realistic answer is “No one knows how many rape reports are false, but it’s clearly too many (under the ‘one is too many’ clause of injustice).”
Obviously more (some?) quality research should be put into this issue.
For me, the problem with “gray rape” (which I think is a bullshit term) is that you end up with “gray rapists.” I think rape is already way too accepted, and I’m extremely wary of coming up with a new way to excuse it. Why can’t a guy be responsible for where he puts his dick? In these situations, where the girl is very intoxicated and the guy has sex with her, and she probably wouldn’t have consented, but she was drunk so she didn’t say no. . . is it rape? Yes. You know why? Because a man shouldn’t have sex with a woman who hasn’t consented. Period. Not, well, she didn’t say yes, but she couldn’t really say no either, so score! No!! The guy who gave Hilarity N. Suze a ride and tried to rape her? That is all kinds of messed up. And I believe strongly that if you’d had sex with him, it would have been rape. Because you were being abducted! Your “consent” was meaningless; it was forced, and (duh!) you can’t force consent. What if he’d taken you to his basement and kept you there, but not hurt you, and said, until you consent to sex with me I won’t let you go (which, actually, is pretty much what happened; I’m putting you in a basement for clarity). Can you even consent in such a situation? No! Of course not! It’s like, what if instead of making you have sex he said “Until you sign this contract giving me all your money, i won’t let you go” and you sign, and he cleans out your bank account. Is that theft? Yes! Of course it is!
I understand why women sometimes don’t want to say “I was raped.” I’ve been through it, myself. But, all it does, in the end, is let men think that violating a woman’s sexual integrity is sometimes, kinda okay. And it isn’t. Ever. If she’s drunk, and didn’t say yes, don’t do it. Just don’t. Sleep alone tonight. The onus is on the person doing the inserting (so this includes the situation where a woman climbs on top of a drunk man) to make sure consent is there.
This is so wrong to me. There is no such thing as “implicit permission”, especially with a stranger, and it does a disservice to men, and to society, when we excuse this kind of behavior. If a guy is sober enough to fuck, he is sober enough to know she was saying no. I mean, are you even serious? How can a guy be so drunk he’s “drifting in and out of consciousness” and completely unaware of his surroundings, but sober enough to get a hard on and have sex? It’s just isn’t happening. Why isn’t there a standard of “you don’t have permission until you do, explicitly”? People would have better sex, and we wouldn’t have to have these stupid discussions.
But what is considered consent? Does it have to be verbal? I don’t think I’ve ever asked a woman if she ‘wanted sex’, it was implicit in the actions.
And at which point does imparement take over? I don’t drink much, so plenty of people of both sexes can drink me under the table. At which point am I intoxicated where I would have sex with a woman I ‘probably wouldn’t have consented’? At what point is she unable to consent? Does she have to be passed out or just tipsy? What if we are both at that point? Are we both guilty of rape? Or does it cancel each other out?
To pretend there are no grey areas in mixing sex and alcohol is ludicrous.
I agree with you. I think a guy in that situation should always ask for explicit permission, and if either party is impaired enough that consent is at all ambiguous, they shouldn’t have sex. But the sad fact is, a lot of people are in the habit of getting blind drunk and/or high and then having sex with each other. Both parties could be so impaired that both of them barely know what’s going on. So what’s your answer? Just throw all the guys in jail?
I think there is the potential for a lot more grey areas than many in this thread, but I don’t think the word “rape” is even remotely the problem.
I do think there can be times where consent is very fuzzy. I also think that we should try to give both parties some benefit of the doubt about whether they might have assumed consent. Not a lot. Some.
As mentioned, the figure is from one study and located on Wikipedia right alongside various other studies and wildly varying statistics, not to mention a note on underreporting (estimated at 39%, though that obviously doesn’t include women who’ve never considered their assault a rape).
As for that one study, conducted in the 1970s and 1980s – how ‘illegal’ was rape at the time? Was ‘date rape’ even a concept? Spousal rape didn’t exist as a legal concept (and is still considered a lesser crime today in 35 states), were any of the cases with husbands? Most importantly, were these women told what the consequences of their charges would be on the men they accuse? Is there any documentation on whether the dropped (not recanted) charges would be kept on record? Because in most of these ‘gray rape’ cases, while half the reason for keeping quiet is because the victim doesn’t feel victimized or doesn’t want to go through legal proceedings, there also always seems to be a concern of having some regular joe friend-of-a-friend be branded a rapist for life. hell, university boards still ask raped students to ‘revisit’ their experiences and drop charges against popular athletes.
After reading tons of discussions and stories on ‘gray rape,’ it occurred to me that part of the problem with women defining their experiences may be that so much emphasis has been put on rape=power, so when it really does seem to be about sex (at any cost) it doesn’t seem to fit the mold.
I just have to wonder what kind of sex people are having when they’re not 100% sure the girl they’re with consented.
I’m not talking about jail, really. I think legal wrangling is something else, honestly, and I don’t think the Cosmo article was about that anyway. I’m talking about what, in our society, we regard as a wrongful act against a woman. I think a lot of men need to start looking at their actions in a responsible way. Not as “What can I (did I ) get away with,” but as “What is the honorable way to act.” I think we need to start seeing a woman’s sexual integrity as something that is non-negotiably hers, and stop trying to rationalize sexual assault. And I think the whole “gray rape” discussion is a step in a completely wrong direction. There are lots of men who would never dream of trying to take advantage of a woman when she was drunk, even if they are. Probably most of the men on this board (all, I hope, actually). I think, we, as a society, need to be vocal and say, yes, this is the standard. Trying to get away with something sexually is wrong, it is rape, and you are a rapist. And maybe a lot of these guys would be able to really take ownership of what they have done, and change. And maybe, hopefully, at some point we can start to see date rape, or gray rape, as a thing of the past. but that will never happen unless we start saying “This is wrong” and atop trying to excuse it.
Let’s stop talking about gray areas, and raise the standard, that’s what I’m saying. If a woman is intoxicated, yes, I think consent should be verbal. And I mean really, really verbal. And you know what? I think if she’s really intoxicated, you shouldn’t even ask. You should leave her alone.
My boyfriend has a story about a woman he used to know. He’d had a thing for her for a long time, and she had recently (like a couple days before) broken up with her husband, because she discovered he was cheating. She came to my boyfriend’s house, already a little drunk, and continued drinking until she was rather smashed. Then she proceeded to try to give him a blowjob, and wanted to have sex. And he pushed her away, put her on the couch to sleep, and went to bed in another room. Because he knew she would regret it the next day. Because he knew her “consent” wasn’t based on any real attraction to him, but was based on alcohol and sadness. And he wouldn’t want to be with someone who didn’t really want to be with him. That should be the standard for men. Not, “What can I get away with?” or, “How can i talk her into this?” but, “Is this something she really wants?”. And I know we’re a long way from that being the standard, but I think it should be the standard, and these kind of discussions are taking us away from that goal, and are really just an attempt to begin to allow certain kinds of sexual assault, and that’s a slippery slope I’m in no hurry to slide down. Let’s try to climb OUT of the muck, you know?
I think the idea of leaving someone alone when they’re that intoxicated is a good idea, but if you don’t know them that well…how do you know if they’re smashed or just a little tipsy or what?
In the story that you cited, I think that that was nice of him…but if someone is throwing themselves at you, I think that they have to take personal responsibility for their actions. If I have sex with a guy while drunk, or while we’re both drunk, I don’t think I suddenly have the right to call him a creep in the light of day for having sex when I was totally ready. I don’t want to be infantilized–I want to face the consequences of whatever I personally consented to.
This is a really extremely good point. Since time immortal women have been indoctrinated with the notion that ‘‘rape isn’t about sex, it’s about power.’’ Does this mean all rapists have to be power-hungry sadists who go around raping just to hurt women and feel powerful? Why can’t they sometimes be extremely self-centered individuals who wanted to get off and didn’t care about anyone else’s feelings in the process? I’m guessing your average ‘‘Gray Rapist’’ would not fall into the category of sadistic woman-hater, but more into the category of ‘‘self-centered asshole who was really horny and minimized the possible damage that rape could cause in order to satisfy his own needs.’’ Doesn’t make it any less rape.
As soon as I hit send, I realized someone would see it this way, and I’ve been getting time outs ever since.
I am not talking about infantalizing women. Had he slept with her, I in no way think it would have been rape, or anything close to it. And while she may have regretted it, she would have been responsible for that. I’m talking about the attitude of men. I think we need to, as a society, start telling men that sex should be about the full willingness of both partners to the act. I do not think it does anyone a service when we start trying to figure out under what circumstances is it okay to have sex with a woman who may not be totally willing. There is a cultural attitude of entitlement when it comes to sex; that men should always want it, and they should take it whenever they get a chance, and should even push for it if she’s less than gung ho. And I regard that attitude and fundamentally wrong. If a woman says no, that’s it. Period. And going any further makes you a rapist, or at least an attempted rapist. And if she doesn’t say no, because she can’t for whatever reason, you might be a rapist. So, err on the side of caution, and don’t do it. And if she says yes, but you know she doesn’t mean it, because she’s in a bad place, or you talked her into it, or you pestered her until she gave in, you probably aren’t a rapist, but you are some sort of loser/asshole combo, who can’t find a truly willing girl to sleep with you. So cut it out.
And if you don’t know them that well, and you aren’t sure if they are smashed or just a little tipsy, then don’t do it. See, for me, the default is, don’t do it. If she’s really into you, do it in the morning, when you’re sure she’s sober. But not getting laid tonight isn’t a crime. Having sex with a woman who didn’t say yes is. And trying to push the boundaries leads to bad sex at least, and rape in the worst cases.
For all the “gray rape” defenders, and all the rapist apologists (of which I haven’t seen any here, but I mean, in general), what is wrong with the idea of saying to men, “You are responsible for where you put your dick. You do not have a right to fuck anyone, and it’s your job to make sure you don’t have sex with a woman against her will.” For any decent guy, these things aren’t even an issue; there’s no question. And for the less then decent guys, I think this is a message they need to hear.
Exactly. If I climb on top of a guy and start taking my clothes off, I don’t think he can be faulted for considering that consent, no matter how drunk I am. And let’s face it, *that’s * what people are trying to imply is rape, because I think we’re all in agreement that *him * climbing on top of *me * knowing that I’m too wasted to do anything about it IS in fact, problematic at best.
Why on earth is it that if I get drunk and *drive * that’s my responsibility, but if I get drunk and *fuck * I’m a victim?
I despise this myth, for this very reason. Rape IS about sex. It’s sometimes about gaining power through sex, and sometimes it’s about getting your rocks off and not caring whether or not your masturbation sleeve has a pulse and feelings.
I think the whole “rape isn’t about sex” thing was promoted by the same mindset that thinks if a woman didn’t scream and fight through the whole event and get herself injured or killed in the process, it wasn’t really rape. Women who suffer through it silently after the first “No” to avoid injury were “saying no but meaning yes” or some shit and thus weren’t really raped. Or they were “grey raped” or something. Bullocks.
At the same time, when people equate rape with guys who just really, really want to have sex, they have trouble believing that a good-looking, normal-seeming guy would need to ‘resort’ to raping anyone. You still hear ‘Why would he need to rape someone? He could have anyone?’, especially in celeb cases.
I’m not just talking about women, but anyone who is raped. You could literally say yes, but when incapacitated, and it’s not what you would have meant. If the potential rapist is competent to see the impairment, perhaps they should know better.
We’ll have to agree to disagree then, on how being drunk affects competency to consent. I also agree that when both parties are incapacitated, things are much more complicated.
I think I’m being misunderstood. My example was meant to illustrate what I consider to be the “correct” attitude of a man in dealing with sex. She said yes, consent was given. But that doesn’t necessarily mean full speed ahead. It means the man has to stop and think too, “Do I want this?” And if he knows she isn’t really into him, he should be comfortable, happy even, with saying, "No, I don’t. I don’t want to “get away’ with this. I only want sex with a totally willing partner, because I deserve that, and so does she.” But so many men see sex as some kind of sport, where women are like goalies, preventing men from making that point. And if they get any kind of opening… he shoots, he SCORES!! I think sex should be less about trying to “get some” and more about mutual affection, and respect, and enjoyment. Women and men need to be equal partners, not because if you aren’t you could go to jail, but because you recognize the fundamental humanity of the person you want to have sex with. And the whole sport mentality leads to bad sex, and sometimes rape, because it puts everyone in the position of referee; was this a foul? Was there unnecessary roughness? I’m saying, throw out the whole idea! the concept of “gray rape” is just a continuation of this whole mentality, and it’s wrong. Women aren’t defenders of the pussy; sex is based on mutual affection.
And I think there are, in fact, people here saying that if he climbs on top of you when you are too wasted to do anything about it might be okay, since that’s exactly what the story in the OP was, in fact. That’s what this whole discussion is about. That’s what “gray rape” is.
Really? That’s totally outside my circles.
I had a girlfriend in college who longly wanted to know why I never ‘took advantage’ of her the few times she was drunk. I responded by reminding her that when she got drunk, it was puking in the toilet drunk, not tipsy drunk. I have no idea how I would have handled that situation if she had just been tipsy or buzzed or something.
Is there really a group of women out there that want to be ‘taken advantage’ of (to some extent or another) while intoxicated? Or was I just dating an oddball?
If the innernets have taught me anything, it’s that there are people who will get off on anything you can think of.
Which is to say, yes, there are probably groups of women who want to be “taken advantage” of while intoxicated. And yes, she’s a bit of an oddball. 
Are you sure she just wasn’t used to being with a nice guy, and wasn’t sure how to react to you when you weren’t an asshole?
ETA: I’m very happy to hear that men pushing for sex is outside your circles. You must run with classy people. But, I think on college campuses especially, it’s a common attitude. Maybe it is changing, though. It should.