General News Discussion

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Going off track here but the copper who attacked Ian Tomlinson wasn't drunk. He just lashed out at the bloke basically because he (the copper) was a thug. No other reason. There's no doubt a violent drunk will be attacking a copper somewhere but those people will not get very far with their attack. The police can abuse their power and get away with it. I've seen someone handcuffed in the back of a police car (with their hands being cuffed behind their back) getting a beating from the coppers inside the car. God knows what the bloke had done or said but it's not what you expect to see from people who are suppossed to be serving the community.

Apologies that was off track, but sometimes mention of the police and incidents like the Ian Tomlinson one get my blood pressure right up.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

You do understand that a blackout isn't unconsciousness? You seem completely conscious to other people, walking around, animated etc. - but you remember nothing until you have a sense of 'waking up'. And if you're in the middle of doing something (in my case I was standing up at a gig) then you realise you must have been active the whole time. But if you 'wake up' flat on your back being penetrated, you're not going to think you were conscious, especially if you've never experienced a blackout. And you won't believe the man when he says you consented and were an active participant.

So, rape for the woman, consensual (if drunken) sex for the man.

[LondonTom]

erm yeah you have to be penetrated with a penis otherwise its sexual assault

from wiki

Rape is defined as follows:

^{Rape (1) A person (A) commits an offence if— (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person with his penis, B does not consent to the penetration, and A does not reasonably believe that B consents.}

[lost]

What about if a female has a strap on?

[eFestivals]

having sex with someone while they sleep is non-consensual sex, and hence it is rape.

I'm not trying to say it's OK to do it, just to make that clear before I start. And I'm certainly not trying to justify rape.

But rape is a 'head crime'. A person is only raped if they feel they've been raped. An act of intercourse can happen and a person can feel completely happy about it, or they can feel raped. Which of these it is is decided in a person's head.

If sex without explicit consent is legally rape, then the law is an ass. The reality of sex proves that.

Nothing I've said there is saying that a person shouldn't get explicit consent before sex. I'm merely saying that if they don't then (outside of any legal aspects) it's not necessarily rape. Whether it is rape or not is decided in the head of the participants.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

I'm not trying to say it's OK to do it, just to make that clear before I start. And I'm certainly not trying to justify rape.

But rape is a 'head crime'. A person is only raped if they feel they've been raped. An act of intercourse can happen and a person can feel completely happy about it, or they can feel raped. Which of these it is is decided in a person's head.

If sex without explicit consent is legally rape, then the law is an ass. The reality of sex proves that.

Nothing I've said there is saying that a person shouldn't get explicit consent before sex. I'm merely saying that if they don't then (outside of any legal aspects) it's not necessarily rape. Whether it is rape or not is decided in the head of the participants.

[eFestivals]

I dont think the law is an ass. Over the years we have seen things with sexual offences, especially rape, change dramatically in law. Like I said earlier a woman had to physically try to fight of her attacker for it to be rape. Common law has seen the definition of consent change. But I think the lawmakers realise that there is the safety net of the CPS and a trial by jury. The CPS are loathe to put a victim in front of a jury if the case will probably fail. (Although I admit not always).

The law is definitely as ass over rape as things stand.

The way the law stands now, it's "technical rape" if explicit consent isn't given - and therefore a person is guilty in law of rape.

And yet the person who has been "technically" or "legally" raped doesn't feel like they've been raped at all, they feel they've been made love to. So how is that rape?

None of that is saying that it's wrong to have tightened the laws around rape, as has happened - but what has happened has also included the ridiculous as well as the sensible, and that ends up bringing the whole concept of rape into the disrepute. It undermines the attempts at reaching a much more sensible place in law for rape and rape trials.

I understand why lawmakers have felt the need for there to be explicit consent, and in theory it's a great idea; but in practice it can lead to the ridiculous. I don't have the answer for how this can be better defined, but as things stand it's ridiculous.

The Assange case in Sweden (appears, from what i've read) to bear out this "ridiculous" (from one side of the story [if that side is the truth of course], at least). He had sex with a woman whilst she was asleep, and she had no problem with him doing that.

And yet when she was talking to the police about everything that happened, she mentioned the sex whilst asleep, and Assange ends up on a rape charge - despite her (in at least one version of the story; I'm working here on the basis of that version being correct) not feeling raped. And that scenario *IS* ridiculous.

[Purple Monkey]

http://m.guardian.co.uk/ms/p/gnm/op/sYFFOqGB4iZLR-DQO91AOkg/view.m?id=15&gid=business/2012/aug/23/britains-richest-gained-quantative-easing-bank&cat=top-stories

I would sign up for a revolution in a heartbeat.

[Spartacus Mars]

WAR (Women Against Rape), founded 1976, are defending Assange.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/women-against-rape-julian-assange

[lost]

Same WAR writer, different leftie pinup:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/03/dominique-strauss-kahn-prejudice-politics

you honestly couldn't make this shit up:

But why is a woman's credibility relevant to a charge when that of the accused is not? Does that mean a rape charge can be dismissed? Other women with much more social power have accused DSK of being a sexual predator, of abusing his position as one of the most powerful men in the financial world and of attempted rape.

So this is what victims of rape face: a criminal justice system where prejudice and politics may shape the investigation and any trial – and even determine the outcome.

[Ed209]

WAR (Women Against Rape), founded 1976, are defending Assange.

http://www.guardian....-julian-assange

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

Same WAR writer, different leftie pinup:

http://www.guardian....judice-politics

you honestly couldn't make this shit up:

[lost]

I don't understand what's so shocking about that quote? Surely every allegation of rape or any crime should be taken seriously, no matter where it's come from?

[feral chile]

I would think the rape charge itself would depend on his actions when you told him to stop.

Edited August 23, 2012 by feral chile

[Spindles]

That last paragraph is mental. I've met people who've expressed some pretty crazy opinions, but that's just Jeremy Clarkson territory.

[eFestivals]

For something completely different....

Avril Latrine is going to marry Chad Kroeger of Nickelback.

Chavril !!

[Spartacus Mars]

Avril Latrine is going to marry Chad Kroeger of Nickelback.

[The Nal]

Rumours that Beckham has been banging Katherine Jenkins. Super injunction due to be lifted apparently.

[AcademicPistol]

For something completely different....

Avril Latrine is going to marry Chad Kroeger of Nickelback.

Chavril !!

[grumpyhack]

Rumours that Beckham has been banging Katherine Jenkins. Super injunction due to be lifted apparently.

[The Nal]

Denied absolutely by Jenkins who says she's only met him twice in company and has never been alone with him.

Edited August 24, 2012 by The Nal

[Ed209]

Here we go again.

Can Americans please stop shooting eachother

Edited August 24, 2012 by Ed209

[Alcatraz]

Here we go again.

Can Americans please stop shooting eachother

[Ed209]

19 people shot last night as Chicago's deep innercity problems escalate, although of course mainstream media don't want to worry themselves about that when white people are being shot in Manhatten

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-shootings-chicago-violence-august-23-august-24-violence-gunfire-20120823,0,49779.story

[Ed209]

So it turns out that the shooter probably only shot one person - his former boss who had recently fired him, the other nine were injured by police officers shooting the suspect.

Way to go!

U S A U S A U S A U S A

Edited August 24, 2012 by Ed209