Thank you so fucking much for this post. Sometimes I feel like I’m reading and writing in English, but my posts get translated or something after I type them because people just keep missing the point. i now see I was clear, and that I am being willfully misunderstood. Thank you.
There are a couple of mistakes here, so I fear I may have summarized the study’s findings in a less than clear manner. I want to clear that up just so there’s no confusion.
It’s correct that in this study 37% of respondents agreed that they had, on at least one occasion, said “no” to sex with a man when they actually did want to have sex. For clarity, I’ll call these women “Group A”.
The researchers felt that, based on the detailed descriptions of the encounters and their own motivations that were provided by the respondents, 83% of Group A were actually describing an encounter where they changed their minds about wanting to have sex. The researchers suggested that their initial question about whether the women had ever said “no” when they wanted to have sex didn’t require respondents to think carefully enough about the sequence of events, and that many were thinking of dates where they’d said “no” and then later wanted to have sex.
40% of Group A reported that during the same encounter where they said “no” to sex they later said explicitly said “yes” to sex.
I didn’t give the specific figure for this before, but 70% of Group A said the encounter where they said “no” but actually wanted to have sex involved a man who they’d never had sex with before. Many of them (I can’t find the number now) had been on more than 10 dates with this man by that time, and so had reached a point where the relationship was pretty serious but had not yet become sexual. This seems consistent with the researchers’ claim that many of the women in Group A were describing an encounter where they changed their minds rather than one where they said “no” dishonestly. For a relationship to go from non-sexual to (consensually) sexual, there has to be a point where the people involved change their minds about whether they’re willing to have sex yet, and that point might very well come during a date.
Anonymous User, you are trying to ski a Double Black Diamond course while wearing your ski jacket like a pair of pants. And also instead of skis, you have two stale breadsticks you got at Olive Garden last week. You should consider sitting this one out.
After stating my position on the “no means no” issue, I am really not advocating any positions on the other side-issues, but instead asking questions to get a better understanding of what some people are saying. That is all.
To reiterate, I am not “trying” to do anything except ask questions from a position of acknowledged ignorance in order to better understand what some posters are saying (excluding post 250).
Thanks. I just realized that the way I wrote it, those were two separate categories that are > 100%. Oops! Anyway, what you say definitely underscores the point that many of these women had been dating someone for a while.
That leaves very little room for a “playing games” and “giving mixed signals” scenario.
Again, the group that is the most depressing to me are the women who are saying no when they actually want to have sex because of a bad past experience. Those “mixed signals” are fear.
OK, for a position of ignorance, it doesn’t make any difference if the person assaulting you is your preferred gender, your non preferred gender, or a gorilla. Bi people can get sexually assaulted. Sexual assault happens when you do not want the sexual touch (assault usually involves touch - harassment doesn’t - but can be as intimidating) and get it anyway. This isn’t accidental touch - bumping into a woman isn’t sexual assault. Bumping into her for the purpose of grabbing her breasts is. If, by some improbability, you fall into a woman in such a way that you grab her breasts, you should IMMEDIATELY stammer a heartfelt apology and then drop it, leaving her alone and avoid her for the rest of eternity.
Creeping is different behavior and still bad. Creeping often doesn’t escalate to assault or harassment. Its going behind Angela Merkle at a summit and giving her a shoulder rub she didn’t request. Its managing to be outside her English class every day as she leaves to say “you sure look nice in that sweater.”
And so we are clear, there are prosecutable cases of sexual assault, harassment and rape - and there are the common use way women (and some men) use these words. What women consider rape is often a much lower bar than what would be a prosecutable offense. But regardless of if you can go to prison or not, its still a shitty way to treat another human being.
When I made my first post that defended any kind of position on this side-issue, I thought that gender must be an important factor in defining how bad experiencing sexual assault is, so I posted:
…where my intent wasn’t to advocate this position, but to ask:
So I admit that post 250 was a mistake because instead of asking whether women feel that gender is a factor in how bad experiencing sexual assault is like I did in my next post, I made the assumption that getting sexually assaulted by the same sex (if straight) is worse than getting sexually assaulted by the opposite sex.
Of course, personal opinion about which is worse also comes into play on this issue.
Well, it’s clear that the “misanthrope” diagnosis is true, if you’ve never known someone who committed rape without the intent to. I know LOTS of fuckers like that just in my fraternity, who pushed past “no” or “she’s drunk” and found themselves in trouble.
The pro-men side? The PRO-MEN side? You fuckin make me want to vomit. You’re not the pro-men side, you’re the asshole side. And this after you accuse others of speaking for all women. Fuckin puke.
If anything it ought to be less awful. A straight woman is still gonna want to have sexual relationships with other men, but a sexual assault from a man can trigger all sorts of PTSD that will make that more difficult. A straight man has no interest in pursuing sexual relationships with other men, so a sexual assault from a man won’t fuck up that part of his life as badly.
But all that’s stupid theory anyway, because sexual assault is awful, full stop.
Jesus Christ, people. What the fuck difference does it make if kissing is worse than rape, or if it worse if it’s gay, or whatever bullshit argument you’re making? Why is this debate even happening? That’s not even the goddamn point.
The point is, it’s scary and traumatizing to be forced into a situation where you’re with someone who is ignoring your protests, you have no control over the situation, and you don’t know what’s going to happen. And that’s a shitty thing to put someone through on the chance they may be “playing hard to get”.
Whether or not rape is worse than “force kissing” is an unrelated (and very stupid) debate. And the only reason gay men were brought up was just as an effort try to get you to actually understand the situation a woman can be put in and maybe show a little empathy. But that was clearly useless. At this point if you still can’t understand, obviously something crucial is missing in your brain and you’re a lost cause.
I think we could spend a lot of time discussing the minutiae of what is right and wrong in a relationship, but we would be better off looking at the big picture. What can we do to prevent sexual assault and rape?
This thread and the other one have already got out of hand. Should we take this over to Great Debates? I have a post already made but if somebody else wants to start it, I’m fine with that.
