Sex is not something you should be “culpable” for.
Having sex with someone when you know, or reasonably should know, that their capacity to offer informed consent is diminished, on the other hand, is.
I’ve looked into Roma culture online before. There isn’t anything about offering to shake hands being utterly offensive. This, like most of what ZPG talks about, is her own personal bugabear.
The stuff about men and women not touching is there, sure. But there’s nothing about putting your hand out. And as she states, all you have to do is wear a glove in a hand shake situation. That’s the type of thing a normal Roma would do. Heck, there are a lot of Roma who will touch in order to do their job. The most obvious is the female palm reader who still does male palms.
If you’ve read anything she’s written, everything she believes is motivated by hatred. She’s taken the radical feminist who hates men, and extended that to everything. Anything she believes is wrong is because she hates the people who do it.
And that, my friends, is why the term “social justice warrior” exists. It’s misapplied all the time, but here’s it’s perfectly accurate. ZPG is a narcissistic bigot. All that matters is her and her own beliefs.
I’m not sure why you guys engage with her.
Who even cares? This is not a thread about ZPGZ. The law in question is not about handshaking. The point is that expecting people to receive an affirmative response before proceeding with intimate contact has nothing to do with the OP’s asinine attempt to pretend that women filing false rape charges is the “real” problem here.
I agree with every word of this. There was a woman in my office who preferred not to shake hands (for hygiene purposes) and she would politely say, “I’m sorry, I prefer not to shake hands.” No one had a problem with that.
I just want to say that for my money, this post was every bit as crazy insane as the whole handshake thing, and I think we got distracted by a routine we’ve done 100 times and missed what could have been a WHOLE NEW WORLD OF INSANITY.
And that makes me sad.
Indeed and that is why many people mention that this whole situation requires an evolution of the culture, so that it eventually becomes natural and expected and not uncomfortable at all to always have clear unambiguous two-way communication to make sure everyone’s in the same page. As it is now, hesitancy and nervousness are not considered NOGO flags per se, there is a social conditioning in the sense that it’s a fine thing that the partner with the initiative should “help” the passive partner “get over” the anxiety. One of the effects of an affirmative consent culture may be to deprive some people of being able to rely on the other party “taking charge” and running things without having to be asked, but the rewards probably outweigh that.
You’re probably right. I ignored that post because I just couldn’t make heads or tails of it.
It’s amazing to me how much traction this handshake thing has gotten.
[QUOTE=Merneith]
Who even cares? This is not a thread about ZPGZ. The law in question is not about handshaking. The point is that expecting people to receive an affirmative response before proceeding with intimate contact has nothing to do with the OP’s asinine attempt to pretend that women filing false rape charges is the “real” problem here.
[/QUOTE]
I thought we’d established right out of the gate that the OP’s claim was asinine.I don’t think anyone participating in this conversation believes that there is an epidemic of women lying about rape, but I could be mistaken.
[QUOTE=JRDelirious]
Indeed and that is why many people mention that this whole situation requires an evolution of the culture, so that it eventually becomes natural and expected and not uncomfortable at all to always have clear unambiguous two-way communication to make sure everyone’s in the same page.
[/QUOTE]
And let’s be honest, some women buy into our current culture of silent acquiescence, because women aren’t supposed to want sex, and if we do sleep with a stranger we’re supposed to regret it. If a woman doesn’t speak up, she has plausible deniability in a way – and I don’t mean in the ‘‘can claim rape’’ way, but in a way that she can rationalize it was really way more about his desire than hers. This might be why rape fantasies among women are so incredibly common (NOT to be confused with the real thing) - they allow a woman to desire sex without any of the guilt associated with wanting it. But I have this feeling that true sexual equality can’t come from an arrangement like that. I think it would be awesome if a woman could feel comfortable saying, ‘‘Yes, I want to have sex with you, right now.’’ And really, is there any man that wouldn’t want to hear that? Wouldn’t it be 1,000x more sexy to hear you are being actively desired rather than passively accepted?
Or are some men really so afraid of rejection that this seems like too high a bar to set? If men think this new social convention would result in them getting less sex, that suggests they’re having sex with women who aren’t 100% into it, which is not a thing I would want anyway. What is really being lost other than mediocre sexual encounters that feel kind of sleazy anyway?
I’m thinking if ZPG Zealot doesn’t want you extending your hand to her, you really shouldn’t be putting balls in her court! :eek:
Criminal matters like rape and sexual assault should be dealt with by the justice system: police, prosecutors, judges.
College matters like chewing gum in class and putting nails in the dorm wall should be deal with by the college system: instructors, resident advisors, deans.
The fact that the OP dropped his turd and hasn’t even bothered returning to his own thread tells you pretty much all you need to know about his credibility.
Well there were two parts to the OP, “Yes mean yes, dumb idea”, and “women should stop lying about rape”. You’re commenting on the second only.
FWIW, I don’t think there’s an “epidemic of women lying about rape”, but I do think it’s a lot more common than the stats people like to bandy about, especially when it’s consensual which typically involves a he-said-she-said situation. The stats use a very high standard for “false claim”, when much more would fall into the unresolved category. That said, I don’t know that this law will have a bearing on the number of people falsely claiming rape. I do think it will increase the number of rapes simply by declaring more things to be rape, although that situation is true of many laws. (Important to note: per my understanding this has a bearing only on college disciplinary proceedings and would not affect criminal prosecution.)
This is a bit off-topic, but my speculation is that it’s more about feeling really really desired by a strong powerful man.
Question is whether this law will really change behavior, or just open people up to consequences. My guess is that the latter will be far the bigger factor.
As you note, the reasons people act the way they do are part of human nature (whether cultural or inherent). If women have reasons for not wanting to be more open about what they want, will this law change that? Maybe a bit. But my guess is that for the most part women will continue to do what comes naturally and feels right to them and men will continue to do what comes naturally and feels right to them, and this will work out fine in 99.9% of cases (which will reinforce the prevailing practice) and in the other 0.1% of cases it won’t work out, with consequences.
Do you base this belief on anything besides a gut feeling?
Yes, I’ve read some of the studies and seen how they define “false accusation”.
Sorry, I should have been more clear. On what, specifically, do you base your assumption that many more women lie about rape than is commonly assumed? (If you have those supporting studies handy, I’d like to read them.)
I didn’t say it was more “than is commonly assumed”. I said “more common than the stats people like to bandy about”, and it’s based on having checked up on the source of the stats on instances of them being bandied.
Just to be clear, while I like the idea of affirmative consent, I’m not terribly sold on the idea that it should be codified into law.
But this law as I understand it really only sets the affirmative consent standard in cases where the alleged victim is incapacitated. (I might not be understanding that properly) and it’s only applying an already existing law to college campuses. That’s a far cry from, ‘‘All sex without affirmative consent is rape.’’
[QUOTE=Fotheringay-Phipps]
FWIW, I don’t think there’s an “epidemic of women lying about rape”, but I do think it’s a lot more common than the stats people like to bandy about, especially when it’s consensual which typically involves a he-said-she-said situation.
[/QUOTE]
Are some women lying, vindictive bitches? For sure. But I think it happens fairly often in these cases that men confuse acquiescence with consent. I don’t think that’s the man’s fault but I don’t think it’s uncommon for a woman to come out of a sexual experience feeling violated and not understanding what happened and come to the conclusion that she was raped.
I recall a story once told on the Dope of a woman who was out in the middle of nowhere with a guy when he started pressing her for sex. When she expressed reluctance he started getting pushy, leading her to fear for her own safety if she said no. So, she had sex with the guy. What the woman experienced was for all intents and purposes, from her perspective, a rape. But was that guy really a rapist? I just think of the times men have come to these boards and said things like, ‘‘Sometimes a no is really a yes’’ and I wonder how often it is that a man’s attempt at persuasion is perceived as an implied threat by the woman. Then I think about the fact that research indicates rapists have no fucking idea that they’re rapists, and it further compounds the issue.
Then there’s stuff like this in which self-identified rapists admit to deliberately creating scenarios of plausible deniability to cover their own asses. I did peruse leftover pieces of that Reddit thread full of admitted rapists and assure you it was quite disturbing. For every ‘‘I totally planned this out and get off on it’’ there is a ‘‘I didn’t realize she wasn’t into it until I looked up at her face.’’
Ah, ok. So there’s a distinction between “the stats people like to bandy about” and “what people assume to be true.” I’m not sure I fully grok that distinction, but ok.
Would you kindly share the sources that convinced you more women lie about rape than the statistics indicate? Did those sources also suggest to you the magnitude of difference between the “bandied” statistics and reality?
That one labeled under peer pressure isn’t exactly an open shut rape case if one at all.
Ok, possibly. The respondent says that “[he] could see how she could have froze up in fear” and that he doesn’t “doubt she feels molested.” But fine, whatever, it’s not “open shut.” So? What’s your point?
As discussed upthread, “incapacitated” can be a vague definition, but I’ve provided some cites that in college sexual assault policies it is used to mean “lacking full decision making ability”.
It’s a mistake to focus on lying vindictive bitches, because that likely obscures the nature of what happens most of these instances. I think a lot of people are prone to retroactively reinterpreting their attitude to things in line with what they subsequently come to feel, and this is especially so in instances when people do things without clearly thought out motivations to begin with.
No doubt.
Not everything is a source. You need to be able to think every once in a while.
Suppose, to make up some numbers for example, a study showed that in 4% of rape accusations the woman retracted the accusation, that would not justify declaring that only 4% of rape accusations are false, and if someone bandied that stat it would be a distortion.
It should be obvious to anyone who had half a brain and no axe to grind that many many instances of rape allegations will not be resolved conclusively one way or the other, especially of the “date rape” sort. That would make it virtually impossible to pin down the true percentage of false accusations, so no answer as to your “magnitude” question. But the point is that if a particular study attempts to answer this question by using a restrictive definition of false accusation, then those stats will certainly understate the level of false accusations, by some unknown magnitude.