Ched Evans situation

[Loz]

OK, I've listened (since you asked so nicely!). Whedon is actually quite an engaging speaker, isn't he? There's not much there I didn't agree with.

You might be horrified at this, but I think that, ideologically, we are actually not too far away from each other.

In fact, I think I am closer to your way of thinking than david_carnell's. We both see that gender issues affect both sexes, though we disagree how they should be tackled - though probably not as much as three pages of sometimes impassioned posting would suggest.

I think we both are, in my shaky terminology, basically 'equalitist/egalitarian', even though you like to call it 'feminist' and I don't.

[legalbeagle]

This thread started as a question about Ched Evans and rape.

Feminism, or any other ideology aside, rape is overwhelmingly something done by men, to women. It is an act of power and control, not sexual attraction. It is one of the few crimes in which victim blaming is rife. The definition of consent is widely misunderstood by the public, and until relatively recently by the police and court system too. In fact, the court system is still in the process of defining it.

The suggestion that if you are falling over drunk and someone has sex with you, you are at least in part to blame, is abhorrent under any circumstances. Men who do that do NOT have an uncontrollable urge to have sex with you because you led them on and they can no longer help themselves. They have an uncontrollable urge to show their power over and disrespect for women.

I've suggested that educating young people on this topic is key and I stand by that.

I will be teaching my son that if a woman he does not know is properly drunk, and shows an interest in him, then he should take her number and deliver her safely home to sleep alone. If he doesn't know whether her consent is genuine because she is only tipsy, he should do the same.

If the now sober girl is still interested in him the next day, then lucky him. If she's not, then it's a good indication that she wasn't really interested the night before either. He may get less sex that way. But he also won't be a rapist.

If any male wants to get laid because he is hormonal/immature/hasn't had it for a while, and so goes for the pissed women, he is a sleezebag. Have some respect for the bodily integrity of another human being and grow the fuck up. If you're old enough to have sex you're old enough to take responsibility for your actions. It's a dick. Contrary to popular belief, it does not dictate everything that you do. (If it does, get help.)

I will also be teaching my daughter that she SHOULD be treated with this level of respect by men, but will undoubtedly meet some who fall short. I can only hope she will spot them in time.

If you agree with that Loz, then no, we are not too far apart.

[Loz]

I would agree (and have agreed) with all that, LB. I merely expressed it in more gender neutral language. Plus I was also referring to the wider issues we covered.

But, you obviously don't agree with my conclusion. Fair enough.

[legalbeagle]

Oh I do mostly agree with your conclusion. Just bringing us back to the point of the thread. On which we also seem to mostly agree.

I may need to lay down.

[LadyDeliah]

legalbeagle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This thread started as a question about Ched Evans

> and rape.

>

> Feminism, or any other ideology aside, rape is

> overwhelmingly something done by men, to women. It

> is an act of power and control, not sexual

> attraction. It is one of the few crimes in which

> victim blaming is rife. The definition of consent

> is widely misunderstood by the public, and until

> relatively recently by the police and court system

> too. In fact, the court system is still in the

> process of defining it.

>

> The suggestion that if you are falling over drunk

> and someone has sex with you, you are at least in

> part to blame, is abhorrent under any

> circumstances. Men who do that do NOT have an

> uncontrollable urge to have sex with you because

> you led them on and they can no longer help

> themselves. They have an uncontrollable urge to

> show their power over and disrespect for women.

>

> I've suggested that educating young people on this

> topic is key and I stand by that.

>

> I will be teaching my son that if a woman he does

> not know is properly drunk, and shows an interest

> in him, then he should take her number and deliver

> her safely home to sleep alone. If he doesn't know

> whether her consent is genuine because she is only

> tipsy, he should do the same.

>

> If the now sober girl is still interested in him

> the next day, then lucky him. If she's not, then

> it's a good indication that she wasn't really

> interested the night before either. He may get

> less sex that way. But he also won't be a rapist.

>

> If any male wants to get laid because he is

> hormonal/immature/hasn't had it for a while, and

> so goes for the pissed women, he is a sleezebag.

> Have some respect for the bodily integrity of

> another human being and grow the @#$%& up. If

> you're old enough to have sex you're old enough to

> take responsibility for your actions. It's a dick.

> Contrary to popular belief, it does not dictate

> everything that you do. (If it does, get help.)

>

> I will also be teaching my daughter that she

> SHOULD be treated with this level of respect by

> men, but will undoubtedly meet some who fall

> short. I can only hope she will spot them in

> time.

>

> If you agree with that Loz, then no, we are not

> too far apart.

Spot on.

[JohnL]

Decision if Ched Evans website is contempt of court due very soon.

[Jeremy]

Is it still rape if the woman definitely says yes (or even initiates sex), but the next morning can't remember exactly what happened and regrets the whole thing? I'd say no..

[Otta]

I'd say hell no.

[david_carnell]

Jeremy - while I'd say no it's not, this thread seems to be heading towards a slightly unpleasant direction of men just listing all the times when they've slept with a girl and things have gone wrong. Or when women have hit them. Or women have broken their hearts, you cow (the last one is my own exaggeration for effect in case of doubt).

I think that's moving into very uncomfortable territory. While I'm sure we can all reel off those sorts of anecdotes, it is a bit of a red herring in the wider argument.

[Otta]

This is getting pretty close to a line where by men seem to have to not only take responsibility for their own actions (which of course they should), but also be expected to take full responsibility for a woman's.

The whole "If you're old enough to have sex (and drink) you're old enough to take responsibility for your actions" works two ways.

It is a very difficult line to place, but it is up to women also to play their part.

And no, that doesn't mean I think it's okay to shag any drunk girl.

[Jeremy]

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> this thread seems to be heading towards a slightly unpleasant

> direction of men just listing all the times when

> they've slept with a girl and things have gone wrong.

I wasn't talking about a personal experience at all, it's a hypothetical scenario.

There's obviously a line somewhere between a man abusing a woman, and two people making a stupid mistake... just wondering where the likes of LB felt that line was.

I don't think it's a red herring at all...

[legalbeagle]

Jeremy - the situation where woman "definitely says yes" and then regrets it in the morning is certainly not rape. It's a decision she regrets, which is a shame but not a crime. There's a question as to how you know she definitely says yes, but that's one for court to opine on, not me. Should it ever get that far.

[Edited because I misunderstood David's point on first reading.....]

Otta - yes women should take responsibility too. That's what part of education is for. They need to be taught that there are predatory/foolish/young/very drunk people out there, some of whom will be ignorant of the law and some of whom will not care. They need to be taught that drink impairs judgement, and the fact that they are drunk can be used against them.

That is NOT to say that they should be blamed ever, in any way, for being raped. But awareness of yourself and your surroundings is useful and might teach you how to stay safe.

[Jeremy]

Agreed LB, and I applaud your plans to educate your children in such issues.

[legalbeagle]

It occurs to me re reading all of this that there are no women saying my views are wrong, and mostly men questioning them (and some men agreeing).

I wonder if the men questioning do so in part because you are all thinking back to drunken encounters and half pissed rolls in the sack, and wondering if on closer scrutiny you would, in my opinion be a rapist. (Or a victim of rape, if you are a female reading this.)

Can we just be clear then? In my experience (I've discussed this at length with friends, some of whom have been raped, some of whom haven't, and I've worked with victims in this area through charities, but i am no expert, it's just MY experience) very few women who have consented while intoxicated consider themselves victims the next day. On the whole they are fine, some might laughingly regret their choice a little, some might seriously regret their choice a lot, but most of the ones I know were fully aware of what they were doing and wouldn't for a moment consider themselves a victim of anything other than too many martinis.

The danger area (morally, and in the eyes of the law) is the point at which your judgement is SO impaired that you can't really agree to anything. Commonly that's when you would be falling over/have no memory of events/be stumbling and slurring/throwing up. Look, we've all seen our mates/girlfriends/wives in that state, right? We KNOW what that looks like. Common sense tells you you shouldn't be trying to screw them.

The law points out that the time a woman cannot consent may in fact happen sooner than the point at which she is in the state I have described and THAT'S what makes this so difficult. It's a point that is different for each person. And THAT is why I take the line I do with my son. Because it is so hard to know for sure when you are on the edges of doing great harm without realising.

I'm not suggesting that without a stone cold sober woman who has signed a contract for sex after taking advice from her lawyer, you are a rapist. I'm simply pointing out that there is a line, it is different for each person, and if you are a half decent person you are probably already very careful about that anyway.

[JohnL]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is it still rape if the woman definitely says yes

> (or even initiates sex), but the next morning

> can't remember exactly what happened and regrets

> the whole thing? I'd say no..

But if you're treating a drunk person as a child (which I do)

then I'm saying you might still end up in court (it's possible),

Then yes - a court might decide no - but I went to court once a

long time ago (over a trivial matter) - had my words twisted

and never take risks now.

[legalbeagle]

JohnL - it's a hard scenario to imagine, to be honest. They appear sober enough to know exactly what they are doing but were in fact so drunk that they have no memory? Possible I suppose but not usual. You'd usually see other signs they were that drunk. In real life, it would be a question of evidence for the court to decide. Did you see how much they drank? Did you know them? Did you buy them a lot of alcohol? Blood samples, CCTV footage of how they were walking, etc etc.

It would be VERY hard to spot that a person behaving utterly normally was actually so drunk they'd lost their memory. But yes, in theory you could end up in court. Although the chances of the CPS prosecuting a case like that are extremely remote indeed.

[Otta]

I think most people would understand that if a woman wasn't really steady on her feet / leaning all over you whilst suggesting a bunk up, that she's not really in a fit state. I think the scary thing for men is that they could be out having a great time with someone over a few drinks, think everything was cool, and wake up the next morning to a rape allegation.

I agree with your point of view LB, especially that women should never be blamed, but the vagueness of the line is scary.

And for the record, no I wasn't thinking back to a particular night and wondering whether I'd raped someone.

[legalbeagle]

My thoughts weren't particularly aimed at you Otta - and I have assumed that none of you think you have raped someone, it was more whether you thought I would think you have, if you see what I mean.

Yes, it is in theory possible to be having a great night with someone only to wake up and discover she feels very differently to the point of considering it a rape. But I would say highly unlikely. As we've explored, the point of intoxication that means consent cannot be given would be obvious to most - as you have described.

Even if she was a person whose drunkeness displayed in such an odd way that she appeared sober but was actually beyond consenting, I can't see the CPS being likely to prosecute. That would not detract from her distress but it would be unlikely to result in a conviction.

Theses scenarios are always worth discussing, but if we are going to address the prevalence of rape, then they are not at all common, and I don't think they help us much. Most rapes involving alcohol are clearly rapes, and involve behaviours that no decent person would exhibit.

[Dopamine1979]

I agree Legalbeagle. Victim blaming is quite different from educating both women on how to try and keep safe and men on how to treat women with respect and avoid ambiguous situations. I remember there was an uproar about a public health poster recently which stated something along the lines of ?Women are more likely to get raped if they are drunk?.

Of course the perpetrator of any crime is to blame. Any adult man or woman has the right to go out and get drunk if they wish. However given the Modus Operandi of Chad Evans and his ilk (i.e it appeared they were specifically ?hunting? for drunk/incapacitated women) I hope it wouldn?t be deemed as insensitive victim blaming to point out that this poor young woman would probably not have been targeted as the victim of this particular crime if she hadn?t been in that vulnerable condition.

[Jeremy]

Yeah I think it's pretty much common sense to say that you'll probably be safer if you don't drink yourself paralytic. For both men and women..

[DaveR]

"I have assumed that none of you think you have raped someone, it was more whether you thought I would think you have"

That may be what you meant to say, but it's not quite what you said:

"I wonder if the men questioning do so in part because you are all thinking back to drunken encounters and half pissed rolls in the sack, and wondering if on closer scrutiny you would, in my opinion be a rapist."

It is kind of revealing about a level of perhaps even unconscious prejudice - put baldly, when a man disagrees with a woman in a discussion about rape it's because he is a rapist.

[legalbeagle]

Dopamine/Jeremy.

If someone is looking for a woman to abuse, then a drunk or unconscious woman is probably an easier target than a sober one. In much the same way that it is easier to mug a woman (likely to be weaker and less aggressive), a pensioner (frail), or a drunk man (less aware of surroundings), it is probably easier to rape a drunk woman.

It is a great shame that we have to educate women on their personal safety and predatory men, but we do, and it would be irresponsible not to. I will also educate my children on gang behaviour, and awareness of personal safety (boys are very likely to be beaten up at some point in their lives, and so helping them spot danger is important too.) There are lots of crimes we can help young people avoid. That's not the same as saying they deserve it if it happens to them. The fact that a crime is made easier to commit, or a victim is not very streetwise, does not mean the victim is to blame in any way, or that the crime is less appalling.

As a matter of fact, I do not know if more women are raped drunk than sober. In the whole of the crime, I suspect not. Most rapes are not random punters you pick up in a club who got you pissed. Most reported rapes are committed by friends/family/people already known to the victim. In the category of "went out for the night and was raped by a stranger" well I guess possibly more are drunk than not, since as you say, they are easier for a predator to abuse.

Again, that speaks to the MO of the criminal. It is not the fault of the victim.

[legalbeagle]

DaveR - what a horrible misrepresentation that is.

I was trying to say that some people on the thread appeared to me to be worrying that I might think they had done something awful, or agree with something awful, because of the type of questions that they were raising. If there is even a remote possibility they think that, I was trying to make it clear that I did not think such things of them. That I am NOT peering into their past and going "ooooo SHE was a bit tipsy... WHAT DID YOU DO??!!"

If we cannot ask the hard questions (when is drunk? what is consent? what is rape?) then we cannot learn or progress. People should have the debate free from silly accusations about their intentions. Free, in fact, from the kind of nonsense that you just aimed at me.

Contrary to what you might think of me personally, I am very aware of how utterly appalled some (most?) men would be at the thought of someone questioning their past with such dreadful terms as "rapist". It is a truly awful thing to say of anyone. Not in a million years would I say that lightly.

At no point have I said, or would I ever say, that if you don't agree with me you are a rapist. You have utterly misunderstood and misrepresented, my intentions.

And besides which, I am not the high watermark of human behaviour on this topic. I don't decide who is a rapist. That's the job of courts. It just happens to be a subject about which I feel very strongly, and about which I honestly believe that openness and debate DO make a difference.

[legalbeagle]

On a slightly different note, if you are out drinking (male or female, although females more commonly targeted) you might also want to look at this product, which is cheap and shows immediate results:

http://www.checkyourdrink.co.uk/

[DaveR]

"DaveR - what a horrible misrepresentation that is."

No, it's not. Read again what you wrote.

"I wonder if the men questioning do so in part because you are all thinking back to drunken encounters and half pissed rolls in the sack..."

before saying

"and wondering if on closer scrutiny you would, in my opinion be a rapist"

So when your opinion is challenged by men you wonder whether the reason is that as a matter of fact they have had drunken unthinking sex that, as a matter of reasonable opinion, you might categorise as rape.

"If we cannot ask the hard questions (when is drunk? what is consent? what is rape?) then we cannot learn or progress. People should have the debate free from silly accusations about their intentions. Free, in fact, from the kind of nonsense that you just aimed at me."

One of the hardest questions of all it to ask yourself how your own prejudices (and I deliberately used the word 'unconscious') may influence your opinions and arguments. I put the potential effect of it baldly because it's particularly important in a debate like this, where (unfortunately) a significant minority of very vocal female campaigners have sought to exclude men from the debate completely. Whether you like it or not, this is part of the debate you want to have.

And just to be clear, I'm not making any claim to be any better than anyone else - I've got my own prejudices, and you can never completely put them aside. And none of this is personal.