Drunk male, sober female, and yet he is still a "rapist" according to Amherst College

[ksen]

So that's a "no?"

 

[Derec]

So that's a "no?"

There is no evidence things happened that way and neither side claims they did.

 

[ksen]

So that's a "no?"

There is no evidence things happened that way and neither side claims they did.

http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...mherst-College&p=165573&viewfull=1#post165573

Jones’ original complaint alleges the oral sex had been nonconsensual the entire time. However, she later told an investigator that she performed oral sex willingly at the beginning and it became nonconsensual “’on a break’ during the sex act,” per Doe’s complaint. Documents say that Jones had asked Doe to stop but that he had forcibly made her continue.

 

[Derec]

She claims he forced her to continue - there is no evidence that that actually happened and plenty of evidence that she is lying about it.

Your statement was about her forcing him to continue and nobody is claiming that.

Not quite sure why that is so difficult to comprehend. Maybe your brain is still in vacation mode.

 

[ksen]

So she was "the moving force" behind John Doe forcing his dick down her throat when she didn't want it there anymore?

 

[Derec]

So she was "the moving force" behind John Doe forcing his dick down her throat when she didn't want it there anymore?

She was the 'moving force' behind the encounter according to her text messages she wrote shortly after they had sex ("I fucked him") and she admitted he was very drunk when they had sex. Her claims of him forcing her to do anything (which she made much later) are completely unsubstantiated. But of course, you follow the radical feminist playbook of always believing a woman's claims of rape no matter what. You never consider the possibility (and if fact in this case overwhelming likelihood!) that a woman might be lying about rape.

 

[ksen]

I can't imagine the pain and suffering this guy is going through after being made to force his balls against her chin.

 

[Derec]

I can't imagine the pain and suffering this guy is going through after being made to force his balls against her chin.

The pain and suffering he is enduring is due to the fact that he was denied due process right at a kangaroo court proceeding, unjustly expelled from college and had his life ruined.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I can't imagine the pain and suffering this guy is going through after being made to force his balls against her chin.

Because any sexual contact a guy gets is positive, so therefore men can't be raped?

Is that the point you're making or is there a second way to interpret your post?

 

[ksen]

I can't imagine the pain and suffering this guy is going through after being made to force his balls against her chin.

Because any sexual contact a guy gets is positive, so therefore men can't be raped?

Is that the point you're making

Yes, that's exactly the point I was making.

or is there a second way to interpret your post?

mmaaaaaayyybbee?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I can't imagine the pain and suffering this guy is going through after being made to force his balls against her chin.

You seem to feel that the consequences of being expelled from school don't matter. That's a lifelong problem that basically can't be overcome.

 

[thebeave]

I can't imagine the pain and suffering this guy is going through after being made to force his balls against her chin.

In case you ever want to make a similar statement to minimize the rape of a girl by a guy, I've got one pre-prepared for you:

I can't imagine the pain and suffering this girl is going through after being made to force her clitoris against his penis.

 

[zorq]

So she moved his hand onto the back of her head and forced it to push her mouth up and down on his dick?

Huh? It is clear from everything we know about this case is
- she admitted in text messages that the sex was consensual
- he was very drunk, drunk enough that if he was female it would be enough to deem him "unable to consent". But of course, there is a double standard.
- the falsely accused male student did not receive due process in the kangaroo court that had no interest in justice, merely in expelling male students whether he is guilty or not.

WRONG
1. She admitted to having consenual sex with him. She also admitted that he forced her to continue against her will. That is 2 separate things. TWO THINGS. They didn't happen at the same time and one does not override the other because they are TWO THINGS that she says happened.

2. It is not at all clear from any evidence we have seen that he was "very drunk" or "unable to consent." You have no evidence of this. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF THIS!

3. It is possible that the male student did not receive the necessary due process. He claims that he wasn't allowed to gather evidence. Maybe he was but he simply failed to do so. It is possible that he is innocent. It is also possible that he is guilty. There is so little evidence that we internet people have been exposed to that we simply can't know with certainty. That does not mean the purpose of the hearing is or was to "expel male students whether they are guilty or not." You are imagining that.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

This is a complex issue with multiple people doing multiple wrong actions, and that is enabling you to look at the other wrong actions instead of the wrong action that is the focus of this thread. You are expert at looking at the wrong thing.

So. Let us simplify. Let us look ONLY at the activity that happened BEFORE she took a break. Only that part. If you mention even the slightest part of what happened after she took a break you are off topic. We're only discussing what happened BEFORE she took a break.

BEFORE she took a break, she was engaging in sexual activity with someone who was intoxicated. She was not intoxicated, and BEFORE she took the break she was not forced in any way. He was intoxicated.

By every feminist standard described in this forum, were the roles reversed he would be guilty of rape. So, judging by what happened BEFORE she took her break, is she guilty of rape? She was sober, he was drunk, she came on to him BEFORE she took her break.

Firstly you are wrong about the facts. They both admit they were both drinking that night. They were BOTH drunk. He was likely the more intoxicated of the two.

Now to answer your question, she did not force him to have sex with her using superior strength. She did not coerce him to have sex with her using threats, or blackmail. So no she did not rape him on any of these grounds.

On this forum, if a female is intoxicated that is enough for it to be considered rape.

She didn't rape him.

By what standard?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

5 Bizarre Realities of Being a Man Who Was Raped by a Woman

Can a man be raped by a woman?

Remember, we're discussing what happened before the break. Everything after it is used to distract from discussion of what happened before the break.

 

[zorq]

Firstly you are wrong about the facts. They both admit they were both drinking that night. They were BOTH drunk. He was likely the more intoxicated of the two.

Now to answer your question, she did not force him to have sex with her using superior strength. She did not coerce him to have sex with her using threats, or blackmail. So no she did not rape him on any of these grounds.

On this forum, if a female is intoxicated that is enough for it to be considered rape.

People keep saying that in this thread. But I must have missed that thread where everyone agreed. CITE?
Even if everyone else did agree to this, I didn't. When you type messages to me you are responding to a person, not a strawman.

She didn't rape him.

By what standard?

The standard I put forward in the rest of my post that you partially quoted and partially omitted from your quotation.

Edit:

For the record I have recently changed my mind. He may have been raped and she is lying and he was unable to resist her due to his intoxication.
Unfortunately, it is exactly equally likely in my view that he is lying and she is telling the truth. Of course both of them could be lying in which case we have no idea what happened that night, maybe they murdered a homeless vagrant and thought this would be a great alibi.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Of course I omitted part of your answer - the irrelevant part.

Looking only at the part that came before she took a break. She came on to him while he was intoxicated. By the politically correct standards of this forum and many universities, that means she raped him - or would have had their genders been reversed.

Read the Cracked article. You might be surprised.

 

[zorq]

You "of course" omitted the part of my post where I was still talking about what constitutes a rape?

I read the Cracked article. I'm not surprised. I was a little surprised to see the guy try to rationalize not pushing the girl off of him just in case he maybe might have hurt her a little bit without sustaining any wounds of his own. We are all endowed with the right of self defense. I don't care if I won't be believed in court. I will still resist violations of my person if if I can help it. It sounded to me like he was remembering a point during the attack that he could have resisted his attacker but was trying to rationalize his choice not to.

All of my post referred to what happened before the break. Also, it isn't clear who initiate the first sex as you imply.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I was a little surprised to see the guy try to rationalize not pushing the girl off of him just in case he maybe might have hurt her a little bit without sustaining any wounds of his own. We are all endowed with the right of self defense. I don't care if I won't be believed in court. I will still resist violations of my person if if I can help it. It sounded to me like he was remembering a point during the attack that he could have resisted his attacker but was trying to rationalize his choice not to

Ya, fuck those rape victims. They should have fought back and stopped the rape. What assholes rape victims are. It really is their own damn fault.

 

[zorq]

I was a little surprised to see the guy try to rationalize not pushing the girl off of him just in case he maybe might have hurt her a little bit without sustaining any wounds of his own. We are all endowed with the right of self defense. I don't care if I won't be believed in court. I will still resist violations of my person if if I can help it. It sounded to me like he was remembering a point during the attack that he could have resisted his attacker but was trying to rationalize his choice not to

Ya, fuck those rape victims. They should have fought back and stopped the rape. What assholes rape victims are. It really is their own damn fault.

Um, I don't think that's what I said. I didn't deny he was raped. I didn't say it was his fault. I said that that part of the article sounds fishy to me. Let me quote the article.

"All right," they say, "then why didn't you just shove her off?"

First, think about how horrific that question sounds when asked of a female victim, since most people will accept that a 120 pound woman isn't able to overpower a rampaging rape monster two and a half times her size. But even people who would never ask a female victim that assume I could easily have fought off some girl. You know, if I'd really wanted to.

There are actually several reasons why I didn't physically defend myself. First, how about the fact that I don't want to inflict violence on anyone, regardless of who they are or what they're doing? You know, like most of you -- all of us have been put into situations that maybe could have been solved by physical force, yet most of us haven't been in a fistfight since grade school.

I'm a pacifist, but really so are most of us in polite society -- it's crazy to ever ask a crime victim, "But why didn't you just overpower your attacker?" Hell, Sugar Ray Leonard was sexually assaulted as a young man, when he was already an Olympic contender on his way to becoming a prizefighter. Don't you think he would have stopped that if he could have? It's not the same thing as fighting off a mugger -- all of your physical strength becomes useless, because your attacker makes you feel powerless. All of society's messages about what's happening are wrong.

He seems to be saying he could have pushed her off of himself and been more forceful but he chose not to or couldn't see the choice at the time. He could have prevented a rape and only endured a sexual assault, but chose not to or just felt too powerless to push a girl who maybe only weighs 120lbs away from his groin. Is it because he is a pacifist or because he "felt powerless"? I don't know. Either way. It sounds like he had an opportunity to prevent the rape but didn't because of psychology or ideology or maybe something else he is hiding. Yes, I'm reading between the lines, and maybe I'm wrong, but that's the way it sounds to me.

There are other hints in other parts of that article that nudged me in this direction too.