It's about time women are punished for false rape claims

[Hayteria]

they are two very different crimes.

Well in both cases, someone gets fucked against their will.

Uh...no. One's an actual assault. Come on.

Unless the woman is actually seriously injured during the assault, you cannot claim that rape is so incredibly worse than what happens to someone who is falsely accused of rape. Men have lost their jobs, their livelihoods, their families, their standing in the community because of false allegations. You honestly think that rape is so much worse than that?

Sometimes. Rape is actually the only crime that in certain cases may be worse than murder. The point is that the crime does not stop once the sexual act is over. Its memory causes life-long trauma. And women are pre-programmed to experience that trauma more severely than almost anything else that happens to their body.

Think of it this way. When you hear a child scream, it's worse than just some loud noise. Why? Because your brain is wired to have that "extra" primal reaction to this. In much the same way, a woman's brain is programmed to have an extra primal reaction to this violent act. So they experience it as if it were a beating that keeps coming up again and again and its experience is more intense than any beating could be.

Just as being falsely accused of rape can cause life-long trauma. Frankly, I have to wonder if part of the trauma of such crimes might have more to do with society's response to such crimes than the crimes in and of themselves.

In any case, to insist that specific fates are worse than death is somewhat arbitrary; what could ruin one person's life might not seem as bad to another. At the very least, it's plausible that the extent of trauma might vary from individual to individual; so if the emotional victimization is the basis for the heinousness, would that suggest that it depends on the circumstances and targets?

[Buffett and Colbert]

Isn't giving false information to the police a crime already?

Methinks this is just another one of Hiddenrun's rants.

[Hayteria]

Isn't giving false information to the police a crime already?

Methinks this is just another one of Hiddenrun's rants.

Of course it's a "rant" but the subject is about falsely accusing someone of rape; the idea seems to be that since rape is considered an especially heinous crime, false accusations of it should be more heinous than false accusations of other crimes.

[Duetopia]

they are two very different crimes.

Well in both cases, someone gets fucked against their will.

Uh...no. One's an actual assault. Come on.

Unless the woman is actually seriously injured during the assault, you cannot claim that rape is so incredibly worse than what happens to someone who is falsely accused of rape. Men have lost their jobs, their livelihoods, their families, their standing in the community because of false allegations. You honestly think that rape is so much worse than that?

Sometimes. Rape is actually the only crime that in certain cases may be worse than murder. The point is that the crime does not stop once the sexual act is over. Its memory causes life-long trauma. And women are pre-programmed to experience that trauma more severely than almost anything else that happens to their body.

Think of it this way. When you hear a child scream, it's worse than just some loud noise. Why? Because your brain is wired to have that "extra" primal reaction to this. In much the same way, a woman's brain is programmed to have an extra primal reaction to this violent act. So they experience it as if it were a beating that keeps coming up again and again and its experience is more intense than any beating could be.

Just as being falsely accused of rape can cause life-long trauma. Frankly, I have to wonder if part of the trauma of such crimes might have more to do with society's response to such crimes than the crimes in and of themselves.

In any case, to insist that specific fates are worse than death is somewhat arbitrary; what could ruin one person's life might not seem as bad to another. At the very least, it's plausible that the extent of trauma might vary from individual to individual; so if the emotional victimization is the basis for the heinousness, would that suggest that it depends on the circumstances and targets?

It's worse than death for the simple reason that the trauma of dying ends with death. Whereas the trauma of rape is experienced over and over.

[Hayteria]

It's worse than death for the simple reason that the trauma of dying ends with death. Whereas the trauma of rape is experienced over and over.

If that's the case, then the trauma could be ended by ending one's life, just as death would end one's life. If others would judge them for that, then aren't they part of the problem?

Really, it just seems selective that we regard specific traumas as worse than death simply because these traumas continue; but who's to say this trauma isn't partly a consequence of how society regards these kinds of crimes? Other things are regarded more dismissively, especially if the notion that they are inherently severe traumas isn't as mainstream. But isn't it a little arbitrary to pick specific crimes and insist such trauma is worse than death?

[Duetopia]

It's worse than death for the simple reason that the trauma of dying ends with death. Whereas the trauma of rape is experienced over and over.

If that's the case, then the trauma could be ended by ending one's life, just as death would end one's life. If others would judge them for that, then aren't they part of the problem?

Really, it just seems so selective that people insist that specific crimes like rape are inherently traumatic, yet if you claim other life experiences to have been traumatic whether or not you're taken seriously depends on how "established" it is that such experiences are traumatic.

For the reason described above -- this particular trauma is experienced more intensely than any other.

[Grave_n_idle]

The lack of practical limitations to the definition of 'rape' is a problem as well. Just because you spent the night binge drinking and fucking some dude you later wake up to see is fugly as all fuck, it doesn't mean you need to erase your shame by claiming it was rape.

The idea that adult women who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs) is taking things waaay too far. Yes dear, you may regret your actions in the morning, but don't pretend you didn't act at all.

Okay. You're not worth talking to.

Anyone who makes claims that every drunk woman can't have really been raped, is not worth talking to.




Or pissing on.

He didn't make anything even close to that claim. He made an entirely different claim. His claim was that women can now claim rape after consenting under diminished capacity (ie drunk). And that's probably not right. If a woman consented, her level of incapacitation should not be an issue. Anti-rape legislation exists to prevent violent crime (of rape) -- not to promote good judgment. Government has no business regulating good judgment during sex. You start with no-sex-while-drunk laws and you end up with no-sex-other-than-missionary laws.

That's not what he said, at all.

He said: "who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs)"

In other words - a woman who goes out with the intention to get lathered and then laid - according to strict interpretation of what Hiddenrun wrote - has automatically given PRE-consent to ANY sexual act.

Just because I want to get laid - doesn't mean I want YOU to do it. Even if that was my WHOLE purpose in going out, you don't get to fuck me without my explicit and specific consent. That IS rape.

[Hayteria]

It's worse than death for the simple reason that the trauma of dying ends with death. Whereas the trauma of rape is experienced over and over.

If that's the case, then the trauma could be ended by ending one's life, just as death would end one's life. If others would judge them for that, then aren't they part of the problem?

Really, it just seems so selective that people insist that specific crimes like rape are inherently traumatic, yet if you claim other life experiences to have been traumatic whether or not you're taken seriously depends on how "established" it is that such experiences are traumatic.

For the reason described above -- this particular trauma is experienced more intensely than any other.

Actually, that was a bit misworded; I fixed the wording just then. But still, yes, we all heard those reasons given in school; just as we were all told in school that smoking one reefer is like smoking hundreds of cigarettes. But for whatever reason the kinds of claims about rape in particular don't seem to be met with as much scrutiny and popular rebutall and I have to wonder if it's a case of those who have reason to believe otherwise not being as mainstream.

[Duetopia]

The lack of practical limitations to the definition of 'rape' is a problem as well. Just because you spent the night binge drinking and fucking some dude you later wake up to see is fugly as all fuck, it doesn't mean you need to erase your shame by claiming it was rape.

The idea that adult women who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs) is taking things waaay too far. Yes dear, you may regret your actions in the morning, but don't pretend you didn't act at all.

Okay. You're not worth talking to.

Anyone who makes claims that every drunk woman can't have really been raped, is not worth talking to.




Or pissing on.

He didn't make anything even close to that claim. He made an entirely different claim. His claim was that women can now claim rape after consenting under diminished capacity (ie drunk). And that's probably not right. If a woman consented, her level of incapacitation should not be an issue. Anti-rape legislation exists to prevent violent crime (of rape) -- not to promote good judgment. Government has no business regulating good judgment during sex. You start with no-sex-while-drunk laws and you end up with no-sex-other-than-missionary laws.

That's not what he said, at all.

He said: "who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs)"

In other words - a woman who goes out with the intention to get lathered and then laid - according to strict interpretation of what Hiddenrun wrote - has automatically given PRE-consent to ANY sexual act.

Just because I want to get laid - doesn't mean I want YOU to do it. Even if that was my WHOLE purpose in going out, you don't get to fuck me without my explicit and specific consent. That IS rape.

No, not "in other words". This interpretation of his phrase does not hold. He never made the leap of saying that being drunk means that she invited sex with any one particular person. He simply said that being drunk is not enough to allow her to change her mind after the fact (of having had sex). He was right.

[Hayteria]

The lack of practical limitations to the definition of 'rape' is a problem as well. Just because you spent the night binge drinking and fucking some dude you later wake up to see is fugly as all fuck, it doesn't mean you need to erase your shame by claiming it was rape.

The idea that adult women who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs) is taking things waaay too far. Yes dear, you may regret your actions in the morning, but don't pretend you didn't act at all.

Okay. You're not worth talking to.

Anyone who makes claims that every drunk woman can't have really been raped, is not worth talking to.




Or pissing on.

He didn't make anything even close to that claim. He made an entirely different claim. His claim was that women can now claim rape after consenting under diminished capacity (ie drunk). And that's probably not right. If a woman consented, her level of incapacitation should not be an issue. Anti-rape legislation exists to prevent violent crime (of rape) -- not to promote good judgment. Government has no business regulating good judgment during sex. You start with no-sex-while-drunk laws and you end up with no-sex-other-than-missionary laws.

That's not what he said, at all.

He said: "who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs)"

In other words - a woman who goes out with the intention to get lathered and then laid - according to strict interpretation of what Hiddenrun wrote - has automatically given PRE-consent to ANY sexual act.

Just because I want to get laid - doesn't mean I want YOU to do it. Even if that was my WHOLE purpose in going out, you don't get to fuck me without my explicit and specific consent. That IS rape.

I don't know much about the context of Hiddenrun's claims, but you seem to be misrepresenting them. It seems to me like Hiddenrun is referring to the fact that when one sex partner is much more intoxicated than the other, the less intoxicated one is technically a rapist, despite the prescence of consent, since the intoxicated aren't considered to be as capable of consent. I'm guessing that the point if any was that those kinds of rapes might not be as heinous as directly forcing someone to have sex.

EDIT: And your initial response to Hiddenrun's claims seems like a completely and utterly dismissive straw man...

[Grave_n_idle]

The lack of practical limitations to the definition of 'rape' is a problem as well. Just because you spent the night binge drinking and fucking some dude you later wake up to see is fugly as all fuck, it doesn't mean you need to erase your shame by claiming it was rape.

The idea that adult women who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs) is taking things waaay too far. Yes dear, you may regret your actions in the morning, but don't pretend you didn't act at all.

Okay. You're not worth talking to.

Anyone who makes claims that every drunk woman can't have really been raped, is not worth talking to.




Or pissing on.

He didn't make anything even close to that claim. He made an entirely different claim. His claim was that women can now claim rape after consenting under diminished capacity (ie drunk). And that's probably not right. If a woman consented, her level of incapacitation should not be an issue. Anti-rape legislation exists to prevent violent crime (of rape) -- not to promote good judgment. Government has no business regulating good judgment during sex. You start with no-sex-while-drunk laws and you end up with no-sex-other-than-missionary laws.

That's not what he said, at all.

He said: "who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs)"

In other words - a woman who goes out with the intention to get lathered and then laid - according to strict interpretation of what Hiddenrun wrote - has automatically given PRE-consent to ANY sexual act.

Just because I want to get laid - doesn't mean I want YOU to do it. Even if that was my WHOLE purpose in going out, you don't get to fuck me without my explicit and specific consent. That IS rape.

No, not "in other words". This interpretation of his phrase does not hold. He never made the leap of saying that being drunk means that she invited sex with any one particular person. He simply said that being drunk is not enough to allow her to change her mind after the fact (of having had sex). He was right.

That's an amazing level of cognitive dissonance. Of course he didn't make the leap of saying that "being drunk" means "she invited sex with any one particular person".

That's the point.

According to Hiddenrun, if you went out to get drunk and laid - you CAN'T claim rape. No matter WHO does it.

Actually read what he wrote.

[Mackedamia]

The lack of practical limitations to the definition of 'rape' is a problem as well. Just because you spent the night binge drinking and fucking some dude you later wake up to see is fugly as all fuck, it doesn't mean you need to erase your shame by claiming it was rape.

The idea that adult women who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs) is taking things waaay too far. Yes dear, you may regret your actions in the morning, but don't pretend you didn't act at all.

Okay. You're not worth talking to.

Anyone who makes claims that every drunk woman can't have really been raped, is not worth talking to.




Or pissing on.

He didn't make anything even close to that claim. He made an entirely different claim. His claim was that women can now claim rape after consenting under diminished capacity (ie drunk). And that's probably not right. If a woman consented, her level of incapacitation should not be an issue. Anti-rape legislation exists to prevent violent crime (of rape) -- not to promote good judgment. Government has no business regulating good judgment during sex. You start with no-sex-while-drunk laws and you end up with no-sex-other-than-missionary laws.

That's not what he said, at all.

He said: "who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs)"

In other words - a woman who goes out with the intention to get lathered and then laid - according to strict interpretation of what Hiddenrun wrote - has automatically given PRE-consent to ANY sexual act.

Just because I want to get laid - doesn't mean I want YOU to do it. Even if that was my WHOLE purpose in going out, you don't get to fuck me without my explicit and specific consent. That IS rape.

I don't know much about the context of Hiddenrun's claims, but you seem to be misrepresenting them. It seems to me like Hiddenrun is referring to the fact that when one sex partner is much more intoxicated than the other, the less intoxicated one is technically a rapist, despite the prescence of consent, since the intoxicated aren't considered to be as capable of consent. I'm guessing that the point if any was that those kinds of rapes might not be as heinous as directly forcing someone to have sex.

EDIT: And your initial response to Hiddenrun's claims seems like a completely and utterly dismissive straw man...

No he's saying that it becomes dangerouse when a women can claim she was raiped by someone, even if she was just buzzed, or not drunk at all. Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union, people can make fake reports of doing something illegal, and since in the u.s. we view any type of sexual crime as bad a mruder, they would certainly be jailed, or lose there job and be put on the sex offenders list, think about it.

[Dakini]

No he's saying that it becomes dangerouse when a women can claim she was raiped by someone, even if she was just buzzed, or not drunk at all. Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union, people can make fake reports of doing something illegal, and since in the u.s. we view any type of sexual crime as bad a mruder, they would certainly be jailed, or lose there job and be put on the sex offenders list, think about it.

So you're saying that it's impossible to rape a drunk person? 'cause this is what the initial claim was... that women went out to get drunk and laid and would get upset when these happened without their consent.

I don't think that everyone who has been drinking is incapable of consenting to sex. Everyone who drinks to the point where they're passed out is incapable of consenting and often even those who are just a little drunk become easier to rape because they put themselves into situations where this is more likely to occur and may not be able to get themselves out of that situation.

[Saint Jade IV]

No he's saying that it becomes dangerouse when a women can claim she was raiped by someone, even if she was just buzzed, or not drunk at all. Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union, people can make fake reports of doing something illegal, and since in the u.s. we view any type of sexual crime as bad a mruder, they would certainly be jailed, or lose there job and be put on the sex offenders list, think about it.

Because rape convictions are so easy to come by, especially when the victim has been drinking .

Hiddenrun's exact words give us his true meaning. He said:

The lack of practical limitations to the definition of 'rape' is a problem as well. Just because you spent the night binge drinking and fucking some dude you later wake up to see is fugly as all fuck, it doesn't mean you need to erase your shame by claiming it was rape.

The idea that adult women who get blasted cannot give consent to sex despite their intention to get drunk and fuck(ie, every drunk-out-of-her-mind woman at the clubs) is taking things waaay too far. Yes dear, you may regret your actions in the morning, but don't pretend you didn't act at all.

Going out and getting drunk is, according to Hiddenrun, automatic consent to be fucked by anyone who takes an interest.

I frequently go out to clubs and get drunk without any intention of going home with anyone. However, according to Hiddenrun, the mere fact that I was out drinking in a club constitutes consent. He wrote it in black and white.

[The Norse Hordes]

Show me its a big deal and happens a lot and Ill consider arguing to change the punishent.

But since you wont be able to show that its an epidemic, because its actually rare, I dont expect much.

Of course, considering our posting history, Im waiting for you to say that most rapes are false alligations, because they were dressed like sluts an askin for it.

[Czardas]

Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union,

....

I think I lost about twenty I.Q. points just by reading this argument. Congratulations, you've just made everyone in this thread stupider simply by having them associated with you.

[Surote]

Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union,

....

I think I lost about twenty I.Q. points just by reading this argument. Congratulations, you've just made everyone in this thread stupider simply by having them associated with you.

Dude that's not even nice

[Saint Jade IV]

Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union,

....

I think I lost about twenty I.Q. points just by reading this argument. Congratulations, you've just made everyone in this thread stupider simply by having them associated with you.

Dude that's not even nice

The truth rarely is.

[Surote]

Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union,

....

I think I lost about twenty I.Q. points just by reading this argument. Congratulations, you've just made everyone in this thread stupider simply by having them associated with you.

Dude that's not even nice

The truth rarely is.

but you don't have to say it like that

[Intangelon]

Seriously though, I mentioned that earlier, albeit not quite as kindly as you did.

Yeah, but I saw it in his post and really wanted to point it out. So I figured what the hell and mentioned it again. Couldn't hurt, right?

Fair enough.

[Intangelon]

Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union,

....

I think I lost about twenty I.Q. points just by reading this argument. Congratulations, you've just made everyone in this thread stupider simply by having them associated with you.

Dude that's not even nice

The truth rarely is.

but you don't have to say it like that

Sometimes you do. However, that was a little flamy.

[Eternal Mysteries]

Crying rape should be treated as the crime it is. I only hope that from now on, when a woman falsely cries rape, she not only faces criminal sanctions, but a hefty civil suit from the man whose name she's dragged through the mud.

A 19-year-old Massachusetts woman who claimed Friday that she was raped by Lehigh University police officers was charged today with making a false report to police, Pennsylvania State Police at Bethlehem report.

Breilynne Neumann, of Shrewsbury, Mass., faces arraignment in front of South Bethlehem District Judge Nancy Matos Gonzalez.

Neumann was being held by police Friday as part of an unrelated investigation when she allegedly told Bethlehem police that Lehigh officers had raped her, state police report. She later changed her story, saying an undercover Lehigh University police officer sexually assaulted her, police said.

In another case, a woman faces a year in jail for making similar false allegations:

A woman was jailed yesterday after her false claim of rape resulted in an innocent stranger being arrested.

In an attempt to make her family feel guilty following an argument, Kerry Saunders invented a story that she had been sexually assaulted after a night out.

So what do you think the punishment for false claims of rape should be?

A good ass rooting should suffice. It should be a mandatory punishment.

A large ugly woman with a strap on will do the deed to repay BS from silly women who think they have a puss that can escape without retribution.

[Ryadn]

Its just a dangerouse road to go down on, if I was a young women i could make expicit threats to others on the grounds that if they didn't id drink tequla untill i pass out, and then file a police report claiming to have been raiped if my demands were not met. Its like in nazi germany or the soviet union,

....

I think I lost about twenty I.Q. points just by reading this argument. Congratulations, you've just made everyone in this thread stupider simply by having them associated with you.

For that I award him no points, and may god have mercy on his soul.

[Geniasis]

For that I award him no points, and may god have mercy on his soul.

"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

"A simple "wrong" would've been fine..."

[Terraliberty]

[It probably does though. It's pretty easy to prove or disprove a rape charge.

How is it easy?

We live in a free-thinking society where nobody is going to judge you for being raped anymore so the stigma of immediately going to the police is removed. Even if the accused used a condom, DNA evidence WILL still be found!