magdalene
Perhaps you should check your arithmetic. I have never implied either of these two positions.
I think that if you continue to completely ignore what people say, you will find yourself remaining confused about their positions, regardless of how much clarification they give. You seem determined to misinterpret everything I say.
magdalene ,
You don’t know for sure. Sometimes there are clues, but I would never second guess someone’s decision. If the woman survived, she made the right decision.
I just didn’t like the way the discussion was going towards the “never fight back because you’ll just get hurt.” It’s a conclusion that heads towards victim blaming. “Well, if she hadn’t struggled, she would have been okay.” There are cases when if she hadn’t struggled, she would have been dead.
Ryan, apologies.
As would I, thus my original comment. It is irresponsible for an instructor to instill a false sense of confidence in an untrained client.
As to the relative violent competency of the rapist, I will simply note that the criminal chooses the victim. Most studies of criminal psychology that I have seen can be summarized as: predators seek easy prey.
Aagain, my point is that trying to create a rule for behavior in such circumstances is unreasonable, perhaps even dangerous to the victim. Nobody is better able to judge the risks involved than the person in the situation at the time.
I have no idea what how you infered such an idea. I do not believe anybody has advocated never fighting back. I certainly do not think that those who argue that no stigma should be attached to a woman’s decision not to fight back are in any way attaching a stigma to women who do fight back. In fact, until your post I had not seen a single comment in this thread which could reasonably be read as a condemnation of a woman’s choice to resist her attacker.
The ironic thing is, I first posted to this thread because I found “why didn’t you fight back” to be dangerously close to blaming the victim.
re: the college date rape case
I am not sure I get the point? Is it sometimes difficult for third parties to know the truth when presented confilcting accounts by the two parties involved? Of course. Would clear physical evidence make it easier for a third party to come to a confident decision? Of course. Does that mean a woman in that situation should always fight back? No.
Successful after the fact prosecution of the criminal is not necessarily the most important concern of the victim.
[hijack]Whether Schaer is guilty of rape or not, he is probably a contender for “World’s Suckiest Lover.”
“Honey, it hurts, stop it”
“Okay, just another minute, let me finish”
Hint, if the girl starts crying and kicks you out, chances are you didn’t rock her world.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Spiritus Mundi *
**
I think perhaps we are just misunderstanding each other. Your comment here reflects my exact position on the issue.
I don’t think bruises would necessarily do much to help a woman’s case if a date rape situation turned into a he said/she said in court. Many date rapists claim that they did not stop when their date tried to resist them because they believed that she wanted “kinky sex”. Some people do suffer minor injuries as part of consensual sex. If the police/judge/whoever aren’t willing to take the woman at her word when she says she did not consent to sex, then why would they take her at her word when she says that she did not consent to rough sex play?
If the victim sustained severe physical injuries in resisting her attacker then that would probably convince most dubious individuals, but I doubt many women would consider being raped and beaten to a bloody pulp a very reasonable price to pay for this.
Magdalene:
Police studies have show that resisting an attacker results in a increased chance of injury by about 2%. However, those injuries are almost always limited to minor abrasions or contussions (bruises) compared to the injuries sustained by not resisting.
From “Strong on Defense” by Sanford Strong
The decision to resist or not is a personal one that involves very deep levels of a the personality of the person. It isn’t a decision anybody can make for anybody else, but statistically resisting is the far better choice since those victims who resist stand a far better chance of escaping being victimized. Keeping in mind that without resisting the chance of being the chance of being a victim of a violent criminal act once a violent criminal has targeted you is virtually 100%, criminals almost never change their minds, where as those who resist have some chance of escape, that chance being very hard to accurately state, but it is certainly greater than 0%.
GOOD post! May I add a thing or two?
“I’m not saying that women never send out mixed messages or never change their minds; I just don’t get why having sex with that woman at that moment in time is so important that anyone would over-ride the standards of human decency and manipulate or force someone to participate in a sexual experience.”
WELL SAID! You summed up what I was thinking perfectly! (Applauds wildly.)
“FWIW. I was brought up in the generation which regarded testes as untouchable, no matter what [Not even for self-defense? What was the rationale? - Patty]. My daughters have no such illusions; I have taught them to go for the balls first, the eyes second - I also hope that they never have to put those principles into practise.”
May I also recommend a punch to the throat? It hampers the air supply and can be especially painful if they have a huge Adam’s Apple. Also, pissing, vomiting and acting like a psycho banshee (who happens to be very loud) could be good deterents. Did I mention my husband works for security?
Checking My Pepper Spray,
Patty
PS I’ve just started reading this thread because I was told a truly fucked-up person, JDT, posted some truly fucked-up things. Haven’t gotten there yet…
A question - you’ve stated that rapists who are known by the victim (or at least someone who set them up) are less likely to beat them than a total stranger because the former could be “found out” and then can’t use the he said/she said defence.
My question - isn’t that asking an awful lot of rationalizing from someone committing an irrational act? Kinda like thinking someone bent on murder won’t do it if they realize they might get caught and they might get The Chair? As Spiritus Mundi pointed out, his female friend was in terrible shape because of the guy HE set her up with. Do you supposse that guy was at all worried he would get caught when he knocked her teeth out?
Patty