Seek42 :: View topic - No means no?

There are movies on Lifetime about this shit.

berto wrote:

There are movies on Lifetime about this shit.

People watch lifetime?

There are movies on Lifetime about this shit.

What about guys?
Girls get raped and never do anything, what about guys. I would put think that a larger percentage of guys get raped and don't do anything than girls.

Also, you boys are totally underestimating your entire gender. To say that it is a girls fault for getting too drunk, is also to say that the man involved has no self control or moral upstanding. I guess that I have higher expectations of you all then you yourselves do.

And to say that these girls put themselves in the situation to be assulted/violated/raped/whatever is no excuse for the fact that it happens or does not happen.

This is like saying that women should not be allowed to go to school here because there are too many boys who cannot control themselves. So according to that logic, I myself am subjucting myself to huge risk by just being an S&T gal. Poor logic.

You all can say that these dumb girls who come in for Pats and get too drunk are at fault but I blame the mentality that it is OK and encouraged to hook up when you are drunk. Both sides are at fault here, it is hardly fair to entirely blame these girls.

Your faulty "logic" is not because you are stupid, it's because you are an asshole.

related.

rip george.

IMO the girls should know better. They are adults. They know the situation they are walking in to. They should know that men are pigs and only get stinkier as their BAC goes up. Case in point, only one of these assault cases happened to a MS&T female student. One may not have involved any MS&T students. You don't walk alone at night when you know there are going to be drunks around, you don't count a big wad of cash as you walk around east St. Louis at night, and you don't leave your valuables unattended in public places.

Non-stranger =/= good guy. Just because you know who someone is doesn't mean you know their character that well.

Ewyatt wrote:

U.S. Department of Justice. 2005 National Crime Victimization Study. 2005 says:
"73% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger."
Most people in here seem to be saying that avoiding rape is basically as easy as staying away from the bad parts of town late at night. This is incorrect.

Author:	cmptrnrd16 [ Thu 03-19-2009 11:17AM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
berto wrote: There are movies on Lifetime about this shit. People watch lifetime?

Author:	el_lorenzo [ Thu 03-19-2009 11:28AM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
cmptrnrd16 wrote: berto wrote: There are movies on Lifetime about this shit. People watch lifetime? Berto does.

Author:	tommytomtomtom [ Thu 03-19-2009 2:28PM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
berto wrote: There are movies on Lifetime about this shit. One of the funnier comments to come from this forum in quite sometime. GJ edit dannyboyfx wrote: What about guys? Girls get raped and never do anything, what about guys. I would put think that a larger percentage of guys get raped and don't do anything than girls. I think its 1 in 33 as opposed to 1 in 6. Feelin' lucky to be born a dude right now.

Author:	the naked prophet [ Thu 03-19-2009 3:44PM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
queenbee wrote: Also, you boys are totally underestimating your entire gender. To say that it is a girls fault for getting too drunk, is also to say that the man involved has no self control or moral upstanding. I guess that I have higher expectations of you all then you yourselves do. The kind of guys who take advantage of drunk girls generally have no self control or moral upstanding. That's what I'm saying. The kind of guy who would steal a pile of cash out of your open car has no self control or moral upstanding either, do you leave piles of cash on your car seat with the window down? Why not? queenbee wrote: And to say that these girls put themselves in the situation to be assulted/violated/raped/whatever is no excuse for the fact that it happens or does not happen. Of course a guy who does that is still at fault. It takes a crappy guy to do that. But that doesn't mean that a woman can put herself at risk and somehow it's not even partially her fault when the obvious result happens. queenbee wrote: This is like saying that women should not be allowed to go to school here because there are too many boys who cannot control themselves. So according to that logic, I myself am subjucting myself to huge risk by just being an S&T gal. Poor logic. It certainly is, and it's all yours. Nobody said that but you. Nobody could possibly come to that conclusion but you. Most women can take care of themselves. Part of taking care of themselves is avoiding dangerous situations, like walking in bad parts of town at night alone - or getting too drunk to take care of themselves around guys who are drunk enough to lose their inhibitions about taking advantage of a drunk girl. Plenty of women have attended MS&T without putting themselves at risk, and you know it. Your faulty "logic" is not because you are stupid, it's because you are an asshole. queenbee wrote: You all can say that these dumb girls who come in for Pats and get too drunk are at fault but I blame the mentality that it is OK and encouraged to hook up when you are drunk. Both sides are at fault here, it is hardly fair to entirely blame these girls. Nobody said the girls were entirely at fault. I in fact said that both parties were at fault (the guy due to malice or bad judgment, the girl due to bad judgment), and you insisted that it's entirely the guy's fault. You can argue fault all day long, but at the end of the day the women who didn't get totally drunk didn't get raped. Women who stayed in control stayed safe.

Author:	Kingkoopa [ Thu 03-19-2009 11:09PM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
the naked prophet wrote: Your faulty "logic" is not because you are stupid, it's because you are an asshole. I don't think anyone could have said that better. Good Job prophet.

Seek42 https://seek42.net:443/phpBB3/

No means no? https://seek42.net:443/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=21064	Page 3 of 5

Author:	calculusninja [ Fri 03-20-2009 6:20AM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
related. rip george.

Author:	Kingkoopa [ Fri 03-20-2009 6:47AM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
XD I miss George.

Author:	Goran [ Fri 03-20-2009 9:16AM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
calculusninja wrote: related. rip george. HAHA

Author:	Ewyatt [ Fri 03-20-2009 11:53AM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
IMO the girls should know better. They are adults. They know the situation they are walking in to. They should know that men are pigs and only get stinkier as their BAC goes up. Case in point, only one of these assault cases happened to a MS&T female student. One may not have involved any MS&T students. You don't walk alone at night when you know there are going to be drunks around, you don't count a big wad of cash as you walk around east St. Louis at night, and you don't leave your valuables unattended in public places.

Author:	tommytomtomtom [ Sat 03-21-2009 11:07AM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
Ewyatt wrote: IMO the girls should know better. They are adults. They know the situation they are walking in to. They should know that men are pigs and only get stinkier as their BAC goes up. Case in point, only one of these assault cases happened to a MS&T female student. One may not have involved any MS&T students. You don't walk alone at night when you know there are going to be drunks around, you don't count a big wad of cash as you walk around east St. Louis at night, and you don't leave your valuables unattended in public places. U.S. Department of Justice. 2005 National Crime Victimization Study. 2005 says: "73% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger." Most people in here seem to be saying that avoiding rape is basically as easy as staying away from the bad parts of town late at night. This is incorrect.

Author:	timmy052006 [ Sat 03-21-2009 11:41AM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
Non-stranger =/= good guy. Just because you know who someone is doesn't mean you know their character that well.

Author:	ben laden [ Sat 03-21-2009 12:35PM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
timmy052006 wrote: Non-stranger =/= good guy. Just because you know who someone is doesn't mean you know their character that well. And just because you THINK you know someone well doesn't mean you actually do. And sometimes people just make really bad decisions. There's a lot of good points in this thread, but there's a lot of hand-waving and ignorance as well.

Author:	tommytomtomtom [ Sat 03-21-2009 1:25PM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
timmy052006 wrote: Non-stranger =/= good guy. Just because you know who someone is doesn't mean you know their character that well. Yeah, this is what I was getting at. And I do agree that there is alot of "well its like this" 's in this thread with pretty much nothing to back them up. edit: I have nothing to back this up

Author:	the naked prophet [ Sun 03-22-2009 12:51PM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
tommytomtomtom wrote: Ewyatt wrote: IMO the girls should know better. They are adults. They know the situation they are walking in to. They should know that men are pigs and only get stinkier as their BAC goes up. Case in point, only one of these assault cases happened to a MS&T female student. One may not have involved any MS&T students. You don't walk alone at night when you know there are going to be drunks around, you don't count a big wad of cash as you walk around east St. Louis at night, and you don't leave your valuables unattended in public places. U.S. Department of Justice. 2005 National Crime Victimization Study. 2005 says: "73% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger." Most people in here seem to be saying that avoiding rape is basically as easy as staying away from the bad parts of town late at night. This is incorrect. You are right that "avoiding rape is basically as easy as staying away from the bad parts of town late at night" is incorrect, but you have misunderstood everyone's arguments. We are saying that if you want to avoid being mugged, you avoid the bad parts of town late at night. That much is obvious. What else should be obvious is that to avoid an acquaintance rape, one shouldn't get so drunk one can't say no (or enforce a no ignored). Of that 73% of non-strangers, there are stalkers, uncles, first date druggers, creepy neighbors, that guy who pretended to be selling magazines to case your house, and perhaps most commonly, the guy a chick met at a party while she was really drunk. To avoid a stranger or stalker rape, maintain awareness of your surroundings, and in case that doesn't work, practice with and carry a gun. To avoid a first date drugger, go on double dates and don't leave your drink unattended. And to avoid being raped at a party while too drunk to say no, don't get too drunk to say no. We are just saying that you have a right to partake in risky activities, but you share some responsibility with the criminal who took advantage of the opportunity you offered. It is wiser to take precautions and forego some "fun."

Page 3 of 5	All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	berto [ Sun 03-22-2009 8:09PM ]
Post subject:	Re: No means no?
I'm pretty much with TNP. To say that the victim is never at fault is naive and childish. Everyone puts themselves in the situations they encounter. You obviously can't completely avoid rape and sometimes the victim is not at fault, but you increase your odds of avoiding by not getting wasted at a random party around people you don't or even do know. Basically, it isn't always the case that the victim made bad choices, but sometimes it is. That is also not to say they have it coming when they do make bad decisions, but they should have been more responsible.