What did she expect?Follow

The whole arguement about wearing the wrong thing and being in the wrong place at the wrong time is more or less bull ****. You seem to be assuming that most rapes are of the type were a woman is putting herself in a dangerous situation, but those cases are the minority.

1)According to the Department of Justice only 18% of rapes are from a stranger. A women is more likely to be raped by someone she knows (acquaintance/friend, intimate, relative).

2) Though rape is a sexual act it is more about dominating the victim than sexual gratification. (as someone else posted earlier)

California defines rape as:
261. (a) Rape is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a
person not the spouse of the perpetrator, under any of the following circumstances:
(1) Where a person is incapable, because of a mental disorder or
developmental or physical disability, of giving legal consent, and this is known or reasonably should be known to the person committing the act. Notwithstanding the existence of a conservatorship pursuant to the provisions of the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (Part 1 (commencing with Section 5000) of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code), the prosecuting attorney shall prove, as an element of the crime, that a mental disorder or developmental or physical disability rendered the alleged victim incapable of giving consent.
(2) Where it is accomplished against a person's will by means of
force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person or another.
(3) Where a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused.
(4) Where a person is at the time unconscious of the nature of the act, and this is known to the accused. As used in this paragraph, "unconscious of the nature of the act" means incapable of resisting because the victim meets one of the following conditions:
(A) Was unconscious or asleep.
(B) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant that the act
occurred.
(C) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the
essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator's fraud
in fact.
(D) Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the
essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator's
fraudulent representation that the sexual penetration served a
professional purpose when it served no professional purpose.

These definitions don't seem all that vague to me. Though I think what gbaji and phlare are thinking of is 261 (3) regarding the intoxication. They key part of this subsection is "person is prevented from resisting", where they are so intoxicated they don't have the capacity to say yes or no "and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused."

This isn't someone who has had a few drinks to impair their judgement, this is someone who is too ********* drunk to make any decision and the guy just doesn't care.



The pathology of the rapist isn't one that would be detered by threat of death. Its a compulsion to subjugate the victim to their will.

Bah. Missed this bit.



No. I did not say or mean anything remotely similar to that. What I said was that the rate of people blaming the victim for rape is in direct proportion to the broadness with which we define rape.

When rape is defined *only* in the cases like that mentioned above, only a very very small percentage of people will blame the victim.

When you expand the definition of rape to include cases where it becomes a "he said, she said" situation, then logically a greater percentage of people will start to place greater blame on the victim.

And when you further expand the definition of rape to include criteria such as that in the Koss study (which is where the "1 in 4 college women are raped" statistic comes from, and in which 76% of those labeled as rape victims didn't even think they'd been raped), then yeah... we're going to see even higher rates of people holding the "victim" to blame.


It's not that no one *ever* blames a rape victim in traditional obvious violent rape cases. It's that the rate of blame increases as we move away from that kind of case.

Dunno. Seemed like a pretty obvious statement to make. When your rape case is a matter of determining whether that drunk girl gave that drunk guy "consent" to have sex, then what she was wearing and how she was acting, both before, during, and after meeting the guy becomes pretty darn significant, right? Clearly, you might be more inclined to think that the girl who went to that frat party dressed in a short mini-skirt and see-through top, with a pack of condoms in her purse was more "to blame" for the result then the girl who was dragged there by her friends, directly from her day job at the local church and wearing a conservative outfit, even though both ended up equally drunk and had identical sexual encounters.


Don't you think that a jury would consider those factors when deciding if she gave consent? Don't you also agree that the reason this situation is coming up in the first place is *because* we've decided that anything other then a threat or use of physical violence can still constitute rape? When we start charging guys for rape because they hooked up with a drunk girl at a party, we immediately open the door to requiring that we judge that case based on her actions. That's going to result in a greater percentage of rape victims being held partially to blame for the rape.

Seems obvious to me. Not sure why you're not seeing it.

You base this claim on what fact, exactly?

Oh that's right, you don't ever try to cloud your arguments with petty things like facts.

What seems obvious to the Allafemmes, and strangely clouded to those of you who are insistant on placing blame (partial or full) on rape victims is that women have always borne the blame for being a rape victim, by a hefty percentage of people. This has never changed.

Get that, Gbaji? This is no change.

Seems obvious to me. Not sure why you're not seeing it.