Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

Ched Evans


deadpheasant

Recommended Posts

The sexism here is in that thinking.

Firstly, men get hard ons when unconscious all the time.

Secondly, a hard on does not signify a willingness to have sex. It only signifies a hard on, a capability to have sex.

And thirdly, if arousal is not a choice for women, why is it for a man?

it is a minefield. So, technically, a woman could get a man drunk to have her way with him, claim she was too drunk to give consent, and get him done for rape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 451
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/nyregion/04actor.html

Interesting article about someone returning to their chosen profession after serving time. Hes juat been cast as the phantom in phantom of the opera on Broadway. Theres people far from happy at the news on the productions facebook page.

I know its not an identical situation but think theres parallels

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Women can't rape men... Women can't force themselves on men.... That is why

A man has to be up for it to happen...

Secondary school biology....

Its about protecting yourself from a legal point of view.

I don't think it s a good idea for women to be doing that either though. But she isn't going jail for it.

Do you agree with the "biology" that this guy references:

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/todd_akin_women_cant_get_pregnant_from_legitimate_rape_20120820

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

Almost as good as neils morning glory comment :)

what, where with a simple fact I blew away your lie that a man only gets a hard dick thru a want to use it? :rolleyes:

So you really think a women can force a man to have sex

Yes.

A man can hold a gun to a woman's head and force her to have sex. Likewise the opposite is true.

:rolleyes:

To suggest a man would maintain a hard on if truly being raped is frankly disgusting.

so a woman's arousal is not a concious thing but a man's arousal is?

I remind you of morning glories, where no conciousness exists. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you really think a women can force a man to have sex :) that's what your getting at isn't it.

You are a prat :)

Almost as good as neils morning glory comment :)

What is clear is a bunch of men here clearly have no idea hown terrifying rape is for a women. To suggest a man would maintain a hard on if truly being raped is frankly disgusting.

You are basically suggesting all rape victims where in fact gagging for it.

Sick c**t

If you was being raped I can't see how you would maintain arousal.

I think he's just saying that if a man is drunk enough that he cannot consent to sex, he can still get a hard on.

I don't think much of this conversation has been about violent rape.

Talk about an overreaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you really think a women can force a man to have sex :) that's what your getting at isn't it.

You are a prat :)

Almost as good as neils morning glory comment :)

What is clear is a bunch of men here clearly have no idea hown terrifying rape is for a women. To suggest a man would maintain a hard on if truly being raped is frankly disgusting.

You are basically suggesting all rape victims where in fact gagging for it.

Sick c**t

If you was being raped I can't see how you would maintain arousal.

In the context of this discussion, though, a drunken woman is raped if she's so drunk she can't meaningfully give consent.

Now, this is obviously meant to cover circumstances when she's not fully conscious or when incoherent. But it could cover situations when she has consented, but was too drunk to know what she was doing.

Now, there are plenty of circumstances when both sexes will wake up in the morning and realise their inebriation has led to poor choices the night before.

Women are the only ones who could have an option to consider as to whether they had in fact been raped, because they were too drunk to make a reasoned judgement. And then the man has to prove he had a reasonable belief of consent.

So, 2 people waking up in exactly the same frame of mind are not given an equal footing in law if one's male and the other female.

I don't think arousal is really a factor, unless there's an implicit suggestion that alcohol either affects women's brains more than men, or that drunken men can't get it up by the time alcohol affects their brain.

I can understand Neil's objection now - if you have 2 people who have had sex because they were drunk, and both of them suffered impaired judgement, one can legally be a rapist and the other a rape victim, and yet have undergone exactly the same response to alcohol.

Because being drunk is not a defence, while it does give females victim status.

Bear in mind I'm not talking about sexual predators of either gender here.

Edited by feral chile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly... and that would be sexual assault if the man objected to it and the women knew what she was doing...

It's the exact equivalent, but it sounds like a lesser offence, so the public would take it less seriously.

And that's not fair.

It implies men are always up for it and potential predators, and women are potential victims.

The law pretty much takes the concept of consent away from men altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

So, 2 people waking up in exactly the same frame of mind are not given an equal footing in law if one's male and the other female.

It's taken a while, but well spotted. :)

In a case like the Evans one, it gets even more 'dangerous'. If a woman has willingly slept with two guys but then has dealings with the police about that night's encounter, how willing might she be to admit to those old bill what she's willingly done when that is likely to reflect back on her badly in the eyes of normal sexist society?

My take is that in a consequence-free situation the woman isn't likely to want to admit to a stranger that she's just slept with two guys. That can pan out into rape allegation which puts a consequence on it, where I'd hope a person would be fair-minded enough to then come clean - but at the same time I doubt that all would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is an idea being pushed that a women who is a little bit tipsy, makes a shit choice she regrets next morning, and puts it all on the man and claims she has been raped, is going to result in men being locked up. I doubt that would ever make it to court. And if it does then its usually thrown out / found not guilty, just like the Evans case.

Look at the Evans case. His mate who had sex with her didn't get sent down. There is some level of responsibility on a man or a women has to take for themselves. Where the scales tipped is with Evans sneaking into the room, exiting via the fire escape, he wasnt the one who had taken her to the hotel etc etc etc. All indicators that shit wasn't right.

Can people not see that? That the court protected the man who had the initial sex with her?

I understand that the law's trying to do the best in situations like these.

But it is possible (though unlikely) that some women might have been perfectly happy to be passed around. How would the men involved prove it, and how can you establish what would be a change of mind, against lack of coherent consent?

How would the potential victim even be able to decide?

How drunk is too drunk to make a judgement, in comparison with making a decision you later regret?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't do any of the stuff above because of the possible consequences and its just all a bit disgusting.

Its called being a gentlemen...

You are opening yourself to problems....

I think the only safe option would be to know the person you're sleeping with very well, or not sleep with any drunken women.

It kind of rules out most nightclub 'socialising' :D

Edited by feral chile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

I wouldn't do any of the stuff above because of the possible consequences and its just all a bit disgusting.

Its called being a gentlemen...

You are opening yourself to problems....

there's all sorts of consentual stuff that is "opening yourself to problems". By having a car, you're open to an accusation that you've run someone over, but it doesn't stop you driving. ;)

Just because you think the missionary position is daring it doesn't mean everyone thinks like that or has to think like that. Things only ever step over the 'bad' line if it's non-consentual.

Frame your thoughts only in what is right and wrong, and not with your own hangups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • I think my party got pretty lucky last night, at least compared to some of the horror stories over on Reddit. I was very impressed with Father John Misty in particular.   Perhaps my view would be different if I were a big Massive Attack fan or whatever, but right now my feeling is that if it's not safe for the shows to go ahead... then it's not safe for the shows to go ahead. I'd much rather they were cautious than roll the dice when it comes to something like that.    Here's hoping everyone has a better day today. 
    • It was awful during Father John Misty and I was close to the front. People just shouting and laughing their f-ing heads off about nothing in particular and being louder than the bloody stage.
    • Other things I noted yesterday, away from the obvious…   Positives: - an extra water point towards the back left of the main stages has appeared, which I believe is new for this year (and was much needed) - handing out free ponchos was a good touch  - caroline were fantastic. I’d never been in the Auditori Rockdelux before, it’s a wonderful venue and a great venue if you fancy a more chilled out environment  Negatives: - the talkers. I know it’s always bad here (and most festivals nowadays) but f**k me people wouldn’t shut up yesterday. I wonder if it was partly as a result of people being at artists they had little interest in (due to rain limiting their options), although it wasn’t great during blood orange. We’ll be making an effort to get a spot nearer the front for anyone we particularly care about over the weekend  - not enough staff around (and the ones that are there are largely useless). Most other festivals have them everywhere and are happy to help 
    • Alkaline Trio 90 Barrington Levy 95 Basement Jaxx 120 Billy Bragg 100 Billy Ocean 100 The Black Keys 90 Carl Cox 100 Chase & Status 115 Chelsea Wolfe 85  CMAT 105 Confidence Man 150 MAX Dave 25 David Byrne 145 Disclosure 65  Everything Everything 105 Faithless 80  Fatboy Slim 100 Four Tet 125 (+5) Funeral for a Friend 45 (-5) Garbage 100 GOAT 105  Greentea Peng 120 Happy Mondays 80 Hollie Cook 90 Jorja Smith 100 José González 100 Joy Crookes 120  Judas Priest 90 Kasabian 80  Kneecap 110  The Last Dinner Party 25 Levellers 85  Limp Bizkit 35  Linkin Park 90 Lorde 120 Madness 75  The Maccabees 100 Neck Deep 135  Nile Rodgers & Chic 100 Overmono 100 Pixies 65 The Prodigy 130  Pulp 150 MAX RAYE 100 Ren 85 Richard Ashcroft 95  Say She She 85 Scissor Sisters 120 Self Esteem 120 Skunk Anansie 100 Stereolab 120  The Streets 110 Super Furry Animals 110 Tems 50  Thundercat 90 Tom Jones 70  Two Door Cinema Club 20 Tyler, the Creator 75 Underworld 115 Wet Leg 90  Wilco 95  The Wombats 90 Wolf Alice 135
    • Alkaline Trio 90 Barrington Levy 95 Basement Jaxx 120 Billy Bragg 100 Billy Ocean 100 The Black Keys 90 Carl Cox 100 Chase & Status 115 Chelsea Wolfe 85  CMAT 105 Confidence Man 150 MAX Dave 25  David Byrne 145 Disclosure 65  Everything Everything 105 Faithless 80  Fatboy Slim 100 Four Tet 120  Funeral for a Friend 50 Garbage 100 GOAT 105  Greentea Peng 120 Happy Mondays 80 Hollie Cook 90 Jorja Smith 100 José González 100 Joy Crookes 120  Judas Priest 90 Kasabian 80  Kneecap 110  The Last Dinner Party 25 (-10) Levellers 85  Limp Bizkit 35  Linkin Park 90 Lorde 120 Madness 75  The Maccabees 100 Neck Deep 135  Nile Rodgers & Chic 100 Overmono 100 Pixies 65 The Prodigy 130  Pulp 150 MAX RAYE 100 Ren 85 Richard Ashcroft 95  Say She She 85 Scissor Sisters 120 Self Esteem 120 Skunk Anansie 100 Stereolab 120  The Streets 110 Super Furry Animals 110 Tems 50  Thundercat 90 Tom Jones 70  Two Door Cinema Club 20 Tyler, the Creator 75 Underworld 115 Wet Leg 90  Wilco 95  The Wombats 90 Wolf Alice 135
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...