Rape prevention

[Choronzon]

Madness?

THIS! IS! NSG!

. . .


What's that? The well's full? I don't know...10, maybe 15...what do you mean over capacity? Fucking hell what am I supposed to do with him now?

Fuck government and its regulation, you should be able to kick as many people down a well as you want. You did build it.

[Freelanderness]

Yes. It happens about 2-8% of the time*, which puts it equal to or less than the false accusation rate of any other crime. Strangely, though, we are able to discuss murder or burglary or grand theft auto or mugging or shoplifting or simple assault or racketeering without every damn conversation immediately turning into, "BUT WHAT ABOUT FALSE ACCUSATIONS! THEY COULD BE LYING! PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY WERE BURGLED DO THAT ALL THE TIME, YOU KNOW!" I wonder why that is?


*I swear to god if some MRA shows up to throw the debunked-so-many-times-over Kanin study at me, I am going to facepalm so hard that I may knock my own nose off.

I think part of it is the stigma of being called a rapist, cfr. the whole "inhuman monster" thing we mentioned before. That, and the fact that false rape allegations, as far as I understand it, tend to target a specific individual while most of the other ones you mention don't. A person falsely reporting a burglary only reports that he's been burglarised, not that Pete broke into his house.


Who the fuck is Pete? Fuck Pete! Burglaring bastard!

I actually made a post about this like two pages back.

[Gravlen]

THIS! IS! NSG!

. . .


What's that? The well's full? I don't know...10, maybe 15...what do you mean over capacity? Fucking hell what am I supposed to do with him now?

Fuck government and its regulation, you should be able to kick as many people down a well as you want. You did build it.

OBAMA LIES WE DID BUILT IT!

[Central Slavia]

You're both somewhat bungling the phrase "eye witness" testimony, although her offense is less than yours.

Heh, I actually debated using it on the grounds that it's not technically correct legally, but seeing as my point was "the standards for how things work in a court of criminal law are not actually the standards for how anyone makes decisions in their day-to-day life," I figured I'd go ahead and keep it in my post for the lay-sense of "person who saw the crime happen," which obviously includes someone it happened to.

It really does depress me how often that shitty argument will be made that if someone says they were raped, you shouldn't believe them because there's no "evidence" of rape, since somehow "you just told me this thing" is not "evidence." If people worked that way in any other realm, normal human interaction would be downright impossible.

"Hi, nice to meet you. My name is Tom."
"How do I know your name is Tom?"
"...because I just told you so?"
"You could be lying! Your name could actually be Steve!"
"Um...okay, I guess, but it's Tom."
"I see no evidence of that!"
"Why would I be lying about my name?"
"Whatever, Steve."
"...anyway, I'll be your dentist today."
"How do I know you're a dentist? You could be a plumber who's just standing in a dental office! Why should I believe you?"
"...I promise I'm a dentist. I got my dental degree from the University of Iowa in 1993 and..."
"How do I know you have a degree? How do I know you're from Iowa? You might be from Indiana and just trying to fool me!"
"Look, if you'll just sit down, I'd really like to fill that cavity of yours and..."
"How do I know you'll fill the cavity? What evidence do I have that you won't implant a microchip into my skull and then pull out all my teeth?"
"Why in the hell would I do that? I'm just a normal human being trying to do my job, here."
"How do I know you're human? What if you're an alien who just LOOKS human? RIDDLE ME THAT, STEVE."

So the claim of "I'm called Tom" (which can indeed be questioned if there's something resting on it, such as you attempting to use the name in an official setting, say, when you get a fine for something) is equivalent in severity to the claim "I was raped by XY" , a claim which carries stiff penalties for XY if true.
Wonderful reasoning.

[Gravlen]

I think part of it is the stigma of being called a rapist, cfr. the whole "inhuman monster" thing we mentioned before. That, and the fact that false rape allegations, as far as I understand it, tend to target a specific individual while most of the other ones you mention don't. A person falsely reporting a burglary only reports that he's been burglarised, not that Pete broke into his house.


Who the fuck is Pete? Fuck Pete! Burglaring bastard!

I actually made a post about this like two pages back.

I have apparently skipped a vital part of your post, and I stand corrected, thanks.

And I need to restate my position anyway:

I think part of it is the stigma of being called a rapist or the fear of being called a rapist at some point, cfr. the whole "inhuman monster" thing we mentioned before. That, and the common myth that false rape allegations tend to target a specific individual while most of the other ones you mention don't.

Still: Fuck Pete.

[Nailed to the Perch]

Yes. It happens about 2-8% of the time*, which puts it equal to or less than the false accusation rate of any other crime. Strangely, though, we are able to discuss murder or burglary or grand theft auto or mugging or shoplifting or simple assault or racketeering without every damn conversation immediately turning into, "BUT WHAT ABOUT FALSE ACCUSATIONS! THEY COULD BE LYING! PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY WERE BURGLED DO THAT ALL THE TIME, YOU KNOW!" I wonder why that is?


*I swear to god if some MRA shows up to throw the debunked-so-many-times-over Kanin study at me, I am going to facepalm so hard that I may knock my own nose off.

I think part of it is the stigma of being called a rapist, cfr. the whole "inhuman monster" thing we mentioned before.

I think that's part of it. Sadly, I think a whole lot more of it is rooted in pure misogyny - the only crimes that get this sort of scrutiny are those that are heavily gendered male-on-female (and male rape victims are much less likely to get "he's probably just lying!" accusation than the similarly poisonous "well, he's probably telling the truth, but that's stupid of him because he should have enjoyed it" accusation).

That, and the fact that false rape allegations, as far as I understand it, tend to target a specific individual while most of the other ones you mention don't. A person falsely reporting a burglary only reports that he's been burglarised, not that Pete broke into his house.

This is actually a common misconception - the actual stats on false rape reports suggest that they are far more likely to be stories of "I was just walking along and this vaguely-described stranger whom I probably couldn't pick out of a lineup jumped out of the bushes and raped me!" Most false rape reports, contrary to the very popular "vindictive bitches who regret consensual sex and for no discernible reason feel that the best way to express this regret is through getting publicly interrogated about their sex lives and ostracized by friends and family rather than just, y'know, not banging that dude again" myth, are made by women and girls who DON'T want to get anyone in trouble, but just want attention/sympathy/not to get in trouble for being pregnant/etc.

[Neo Art]

So the claim of "I'm called Tom" (which can indeed be questioned if there's something resting on it, such as you attempting to use the name in an official setting, say, when you get a fine for something) is equivalent in severity to the claim "I was raped by XY" , a claim which carries stiff penalties for XY if true.
Wonderful reasoning.

You are literally awful at this.

[Neo Art]

This is actually a common misconception - the actual stats on false rape reports suggest that they are far more likely to be stories of "I was just walking along and this vaguely-described stranger whom I probably couldn't pick out of a lineup jumped out of the bushes and raped me!" Most false rape reports, contrary to the very popular "vindictive bitches who regret consensual sex and for no discernible reason feel that the best way to express this regret is through getting publicly interrogated about their sex lives and ostracized by friends and family rather than just, y'know, not banging that dude again" myth, are made by women and girls who DON'T want to get anyone in trouble, but just want attention/sympathy/not to get in trouble for being pregnant/etc.

It is somewhat telling that most actual professionals, who ACTUALLY deal with rape victims every day, can generally tell when someone is lying because their story doesn't actually sound like rape as it actually occurs, but sounds like what people think rape is like when it occurs.

We know it's fake, because it's what you THINK true looks like.

[Dainer]

How are firearms going to stop date rape, far and away the most common form of rape?

Firearms would stop date rape if the woman shot him.

If only women were always on guard with a loaded firearm at all times, in the presence of their parents, acquaintances, coworkers and SOs, not to mention being willing to shoot them, and then were able to claim legitimate defense.

[Nailed to the Perch]

This is actually a common misconception - the actual stats on false rape reports suggest that they are far more likely to be stories of "I was just walking along and this vaguely-described stranger whom I probably couldn't pick out of a lineup jumped out of the bushes and raped me!" Most false rape reports, contrary to the very popular "vindictive bitches who regret consensual sex and for no discernible reason feel that the best way to express this regret is through getting publicly interrogated about their sex lives and ostracized by friends and family rather than just, y'know, not banging that dude again" myth, are made by women and girls who DON'T want to get anyone in trouble, but just want attention/sympathy/not to get in trouble for being pregnant/etc.

It is somewhat telling that most actual professionals, who ACTUALLY deal with rape victims every day, can generally tell when someone is lying because their story doesn't actually sound like rape as it actually occurs, but sounds like what people think rape is like when it occurs.

We know it's fake, because it's what you THINK true looks like.

Yup. Telling, and depressing as shit.

[Warinemachine]

Firearms would stop date rape if the woman shot him.

If only women were always on guard with a loaded firearm at all times, in the presence of their parents, acquaintances, coworkers and SOs, not to mention being willing to shoot them, and then were able to claim legitimate defense.

How about not just women. Everone should carry a locked a locked and loaded weapon all the time.

[Central Slavia]

So the claim of "I'm called Tom" (which can indeed be questioned if there's something resting on it, such as you attempting to use the name in an official setting, say, when you get a fine for something) is equivalent in severity to the claim "I was raped by XY" , a claim which carries stiff penalties for XY if true.
Wonderful reasoning.

You are literally awful at this.

Thankee, sir. So are you.

[Nailed to the Perch]

Heh, I actually debated using it on the grounds that it's not technically correct legally, but seeing as my point was "the standards for how things work in a court of criminal law are not actually the standards for how anyone makes decisions in their day-to-day life," I figured I'd go ahead and keep it in my post for the lay-sense of "person who saw the crime happen," which obviously includes someone it happened to.

It really does depress me how often that shitty argument will be made that if someone says they were raped, you shouldn't believe them because there's no "evidence" of rape, since somehow "you just told me this thing" is not "evidence." If people worked that way in any other realm, normal human interaction would be downright impossible.

"Hi, nice to meet you. My name is Tom."
"How do I know your name is Tom?"
"...because I just told you so?"
"You could be lying! Your name could actually be Steve!"
"Um...okay, I guess, but it's Tom."
"I see no evidence of that!"
"Why would I be lying about my name?"
"Whatever, Steve."
"...anyway, I'll be your dentist today."
"How do I know you're a dentist? You could be a plumber who's just standing in a dental office! Why should I believe you?"
"...I promise I'm a dentist. I got my dental degree from the University of Iowa in 1993 and..."
"How do I know you have a degree? How do I know you're from Iowa? You might be from Indiana and just trying to fool me!"
"Look, if you'll just sit down, I'd really like to fill that cavity of yours and..."
"How do I know you'll fill the cavity? What evidence do I have that you won't implant a microchip into my skull and then pull out all my teeth?"
"Why in the hell would I do that? I'm just a normal human being trying to do my job, here."
"How do I know you're human? What if you're an alien who just LOOKS human? RIDDLE ME THAT, STEVE."

So the claim of "I'm called Tom" (which can indeed be questioned if there's something resting on it, such as you attempting to use the name in an official setting, say, when you get a fine for something) is equivalent in severity to the claim "I was raped by XY" , a claim which carries stiff penalties for XY if true.
Wonderful reasoning.

What stiff penalties will Random Guy Who Is Not A Court Of Law be imposing? Under what authority will he impose them?

Seriously, unless someone died and made you some sort of God-Emperor who can mete out legal judgment by the mere act of thinking someone might deserve it, who is being harmed if you believe someone when she says "I was raped"? Because I can give a very clear answer to who is being harmed when you have a blanket policy of NOT believing anyone who claims to have been raped: every rape victim, everyone who cares about a rape victim, and, in fact, literally everyone who is not a rapist, since such a policy is not only deeply hurtful to those victims, but strongly discourages them from telling anyone about their rapes, giving their rapists free license to keep right on raping more victims.

[Gravlen]

The eye witness testimony (if there is absolutely no evidence that a rape occured.) is worth precisely jack shit.
If there is evidence that a person is raped, there is every reason to take the testimony of the victim as to who the rapist was.

With No evidence:
"I accuse you!"
"I deny it."
^
No idea who to believe.

With Evidence:
"Evidence says I was raped, I say it was you."
"You weren't raped!" <-Clearly lying.

People have been convicted based on the testimony of the victim, with no other evidence supporting the claim of rape. I can mention one case where a woman was convicted of raping a man. He claims to have awakened to her having oral sex with him. She claims he was aware of what was happening and consented to the act. The court didn't believe her, in part because she had changed her story a short time before the trial.

[Falcania]

I'm glad this thread is more-or-less back on track after the scary othering "rapists are not quite the same as people so we should fundamentally wage war on them through the penal system" trend of a couple of pages back.

You are literally awful at this.

Thankee, sir. So are you.

Well, he kind of does this for a living. So, yeah. There is that.

[Freelanderness]

I actually made a post about this like two pages back.

I have apparently skipped a vital part of your post, and I stand corrected, thanks.

And I need to restate my position anyway:

I think part of it is the stigma of being called a rapist or the fear of being called a rapist at some point, cfr. the whole "inhuman monster" thing we mentioned before. That, and the common myth that false rape allegations tend to target a specific individual while most of the other ones you mention don't.

Still: Fuck Pete.

Thanks Spread the knowledge, as always.

[Gravlen]

Does education work? This study says so and so does this one. And advertising negatively targeting the rapists instead of the victims decreased sexual assault rates by 10%.

This has been mentioned before, and should be repeated.

[Freelanderness]

If only women were always on guard with a loaded firearm at all times, in the presence of their parents, acquaintances, coworkers and SOs, not to mention being willing to shoot them, and then were able to claim legitimate defense.

How about not just women. Everone should carry a locked a locked and loaded weapon all the time.

I can't think of anything going wrong with this plan.

[Choronzon]

Does education work? This study says so and so does this one. And advertising negatively targeting the rapists instead of the victims decreased sexual assault rates by 10%.

This has been mentioned before, and should be repeated.

I am bookmarking those thinks.

[Dainer]

People have been convicted based on the testimony of the victim, with no other evidence supporting the claim of rape.

People also have gotten scot-free with rape even with overwhelming evidence against them. Incidentally, this group outnumbers that one by a significant margin.

That's not the problem, however. The problem is the amount of rapes that never even go to trial because reporting will bring all sorts of scrutiny and social stigma, is unlikely to even be believed in the first place, and will probably bring more distress on the victim than the rapist.

A overwhelming majority of actual rapes, that are happening to real people all the time, go unreported. I think that problem might be a bit more worrying than the hypothetical false rape accusation that might go through if people start believing victims of rape more.

Really.

[Southern Patriots]

I think NS simply needs to get over its obsession with rape. I'm starting to grow concerned for NS.

But what would a NSG be without discussing rape, all things LGBT, Scottish independence, and a condescending attitude towards Tea Party members?

By jove, if we had a LGBT Scottish nationalist who was simultaneously in a Tea Party and was a rape victim, we could crown that person Non-Gender-Specific King of NSG!

I kid, I kid.

[Wamitoria]

I think NS simply needs to get over its obsession with rape. I'm starting to grow concerned for NS.

But what would a NSG be without discussing rape, all things LGBT, Scottish independence, and a condescending attitude towards Tea Party members?

By jove, if we had a LGBT Scottish nationalist who was simultaneously in a Tea Party and was a rape victim, we could crown that person Non-Gender-Specific King of NSG!

I kid, I kid.

[Warinemachine]

How about not just women. Everone should carry a locked a locked and loaded weapon all the time.

I can't think of anything going wrong with this plan.

Nothing could go wrong with this plan.

[Freelanderness]

I can't think of anything going wrong with this plan.

Nothing could go wrong with this plan.

Nothing.

[Warinemachine]

Nothing could go wrong with this plan.

Nothing.

Rape rates would go way down if everone kept their wits and carried a gun.