Except of course that means she almost certainly won’t consent to sex, making the effort moot. So that’s just another way of saying “just don’t have sex, ever, if you don’t want to be a victim”. And calling it neurotic just points out the hypocritical standards we hold the genders to, consider how it’s considered perfectly reasonable to treat every male as a potential violent predator.
And before the next round of accusing me of sexism begins, my problem isn’t with women. My problem is with a system and society that expects me to give absolute trust to women, something I have no desire to give to people of either gender. I don’t consider women less trustworthy than men, but I don’t consider them beyond reproach either; and unlike with men, I have very little recourse if a woman decides to do something like make false accusations, or becomes violent for that matter.
Treating every male as a potential predator generally translates into avoiding them. If it translated into some violation of his privacy, I’d agree it was wrong. If you viewed all women as potential rape accusers and wanted to avoid them as a result, I’d agree that was absolutely your right. But if it translates into you wanting to videotape them against their will, then no.
Plus, if you honestly think there’s a real possibility that you could be accused by a sex partner, why would you even want to have sex with them?
Because knowing someone to such a degree that I can say that there isn’t “a real possibility” of them accusing me of a sex crime or otherwise mistreating me is impossible. I’m not a telepath.
This is a meaningless statement, since virtually every woman who levels a rape accusation in the context of a court proceeding will, at some level, be accused of making a false allegation… in the same way that virtually every robbery, assault, and embezzlement victim will be accused of making a false allegation. This is what a competent defense attorney does: suggest that the accuser is mistaken in some way that eliminates or reduces the criminality liability of his clients.
Nor do I agree that the overall incidence of false accusations of rape are “vanishingly small.”
That doesn’t point to a flaw in my objection: that points to a flaw in your plan. If the only way ou can achieve your self-protection is through a (probably illegal, and definitely unethical) deception, then you need to find a different way to protect yourself, or else accept the risk.
No, I’m not saying anything of the sort, as evidenced by the literally billions of men who have active sex lives that involve neither allegations of rape nor covert videotaping of the encounter. You’re welcome to treat every woman you have sex with as a potential false-rape-accuser. You’re not welcome to commit a crime in order to protect yourself, any more than a woman is free to mace every guy she meets in an attempt to protect herself.
There is no other way. Not even celibacy, since that won’t protect you from a false accusation. Even videotaping is only an imperfect protection unless you literally tape every moment of your life which is impractical. The problem, again, is the system and compensating for an entire screwed up society all on your own doesn’t work well. I don’t even think it’s a very good idea; I just think that its a reasonable thing to do given the lack of alternatives. Videotape is a side issue, and making a big deal about it like this is a way of ignoring the actual problem.
And yes; telling me to do something that won’t work is indeed a flaw.
First, most men don’t live in our society so it isn’t “billions” of men. Second, most men are foolhardy when it comes to women, they either refuse to believe in any risk or they take it anyway.
Whatever. I was telling you how to avoid drastically unethical behavior. If the only way to do something and avoid its being unethical is to keep from getting some, that signifies that it’s a lousy plan: your choices are to be evil or to be celibate under your plan. The flaw is in the plan itself. It’s only reasonable if you’re okay being evil.
That assumes that I think videotaping someone to be “evil”, or even unethical. I don’t. I don’t consider it any more unethical than having a memory of someone.
So let’s get straight.
-
You’re so afraid of being accused of rape, that you videotape your encounters with women whom you clearly don’t trust.
-
You’re so desperate to have sex with these women you clearly don’t trust, that you refuse to tell them you’re taping them.
-
You don’t seem to understand why people think you’re nutso.
Is this all correct?
These women you’re sleeping with could also kill you. So I assume that you also strap on a bullet proof vest and keep a gun on you at all times to protect you against this possibility as well? No?
If you told a woman that, after your encounter, you’d remember her, would she refuse to go to bed with you?
There’s a clear difference there. Your refusal to acknowledge that difference would be, in another person, startling.
I’m guessing this is more a theoretical than practical concern … 
Then why not tell women you’re doing it? Those that aren’t enlightened as you will decline to sleep with you, of course, but at least you won’t have to worry about them accusing you of rape. Problem solved.
I know I’ve asked you this question before, and you replied with something wackadoodle. But wackadoodle is often fascinating.
The difference beting that your memory cannot be readily shared in the same explicit and uncontrovertible manner that the videotape can.
Damn you, sir, for beating me to it!
Let’s see: we live in a sexist culture in which rape is common, denied, blamed on the victim, and until quite recently was investigated solely by male cops, and in the case of the misogynist whose link was posted above, still is, apparently.
The Home Office report found that the number of rapes rejected by cops included cases where they used their own personal prejudices and violated police procedure. In several departments in the US, police were just dumping rape complaints. Victim bashing and slut shaming are common.
Rape is an actual crime that women are far and away the most common victims of. Rape tortures some women for life, especially if they’ve been falsely accused.
Rape can be committed by one, two, or more attackers, and it usually involves violent penetration of the vagina, anus, mouth, and other degradations. False rape accusations involve being accused by the police and let go. Some men actually get convicted, but these cases are uncommon and tend to involve stranger rapes like the Poole case. A rape victim indentified an innocent who, it turned out, had an amazing resemblance to the man who actually raped her. Years later, when DNA proved her wrong, she actively worked to free him, and to investigate other cases of----this is where my memory gets dodgy----conviction by one eyewitness. That’s just bad luck.
False rape accusations are rare, have been shown to be rare, and yet a certain subset of men fear them beyond all reason. They do not involve getting penetrated in any way or beaten or anything like that.
So: 200,000 actual rape victims, who are really suffering, and are blamed—and are often bitched at by the false accusation brigade—or some guys who fear something that hasn’t happened and if they’re not doing anything wrong has exceedingly little chance of happening?
Real crimes, or imaginary accusations of crimes that the police are predisposed to believe? Did you even read any of the links I posted? The links that talk about false rape accusations are overwhelmingly those by men who hate women…and who fear that women might just once get the upper hand. But of course their hatred of women makes them afraid of women, and of course they believe their own propaganda.
And Der Trihs: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=593243&highlight=trihs For something you defend so aggressively and because you’re so hateful toward women, yeah, you’re not exactly the person to be talking about women. You sound like a KKK member talking about Obama.
I’ve never been raped, but I have been beaten - and I’d certainly rather be beaten again than be (falsely) accused of rape. A rape accusation would blight my life, even if I was never convicted of it, much worse than a beating that did not inflict permanent injuries.
Actually I said no such thing, I just said that I considered it a reasonable precaution. And again, I note the lack of alternative suggestions that don’t boil down to “just don’t have sex”.
The difference being that a tape is a legal defense, which is why the vast majority of women would find even the suggestion extremely offensive. Men are supposed to grant women absolute trust, not treat them like fallible humans. Men are not supposed to take any precautions whatsoever.
Ah! First the “sexist” accusation, and now the “you aren’t a real man” accusation. Perhaps you could accuse me of being gay to round out the set.
There’s been one. It’s the one I do. It goes like this:
- Only have sex with women who don’t seem crazy. (I’m married now to someone who’s sane, so this one kind of works itself out these days)
- Take the risk.
It’s fairly similar, in fact, to the advice I’d offer women for minimizing the risk of date rape.
This is profoundly misogynistic and stupid. If this were the relevant difference, then it’d only matter to women who wanted to maintain the option of falsely accusing you of rape. You suggest that comprises the vast majority of women, suggesting that you think the vast majority of women wouldn’t want you to have a legal defense against a false accusation. That’s way more revoltingly sexist than anything margin has said.