That’s exactly what everyone says. And legally that is the case in a lot of places.
That’s how a lot of these cases are. Even the Cornell one started off as her voluntarily having sex with 3 of them, which she then claimed were also rape.
Hell I’ve personally been in that situation. At a buddy’s party drunk. Someone wife brought a friend and she was all over me, getting me to drink more. Telling other people she was gonna get me in bed. Then the next day tried to tell her friend that she was too drunk to consent and that I raped her. If I didn’t have literally 20 eyewitnesses to her being the instigator and her texting her friend during the party that she was going to seduce me, then I would have been charged with rape. Despite being the one that under the same logic would have actually been the one that was raped.
I was gonna reply to your direct reply to me but I think your account is important and fits well with your other comment to reply all together.
First I want to make It clear that It sucks what happened to you, I am sorry about what happened, I can only imagine the trauma and panic that such betrayal or framing could do to someone, and I am glad that there was a lot of proof and everything was clear out at the end.
I once watched a podcast about Nordic countries prisons and sentences and someone mentioned a phrase that stayed with me ever since. They said “Extreme and anecdotal cases make bad laws” and since then I think a more general expression would be “extreme cases make bad public policy”. The point being avoiding gut feeling emotional reaction that may lead to worst outcome or even the opposite of what was intended. It can be good as a starting point, to evaluate if something needs to be done or change but It needs to be just that, a starting point that then goes on to be based on scientific and statistical data.
Although one of the parts lying is a really hard problem to solve in “one said the other said” situations there is a lot of scientific and statistical data to get to the policy of “Believing the woman”, "A drunk woman cannot consent " and so forth. The reason being, the data shows that rape is under reported, that the victim faces a number of challenges just go forward with an accusations and that it puts a lot of risks on the victim, they are ostracized, people tend to not believe in them, they say it is their fault, etc etc. The point being, the data points out that is really costly socially and personally for a victim of sexual assault to come forward and so is very unlikely that the person is lying. Also the data shows that there is very little cases of a someone lying of being victim of SA. And none of the appeal to believe the woman is law, the slogan is an appeal to have better policy for a starting point in an allegation, for the people coming forward to be treated seriously. No one is being convicted of rape based on a single unsubstantiated account.
I know that your point is about “what if both parties were drunk”, it is the same principle, same data.
Anyway,.I already talked too much, but I hope my hamblings made sense.
These are established facts. They are her own claims in her lawsuit. She consented to the first three but now feels like she wasn’t able to consent because she was intoxicated.
That’s exactly what everyone says. And legally that is the case in a lot of places.
That’s how a lot of these cases are. Even the Cornell one started off as her voluntarily having sex with 3 of them, which she then claimed were also rape.
Hell I’ve personally been in that situation. At a buddy’s party drunk. Someone wife brought a friend and she was all over me, getting me to drink more. Telling other people she was gonna get me in bed. Then the next day tried to tell her friend that she was too drunk to consent and that I raped her. If I didn’t have literally 20 eyewitnesses to her being the instigator and her texting her friend during the party that she was going to seduce me, then I would have been charged with rape. Despite being the one that under the same logic would have actually been the one that was raped.
I was gonna reply to your direct reply to me but I think your account is important and fits well with your other comment to reply all together.
First I want to make It clear that It sucks what happened to you, I am sorry about what happened, I can only imagine the trauma and panic that such betrayal or framing could do to someone, and I am glad that there was a lot of proof and everything was clear out at the end.
I once watched a podcast about Nordic countries prisons and sentences and someone mentioned a phrase that stayed with me ever since. They said “Extreme and anecdotal cases make bad laws” and since then I think a more general expression would be “extreme cases make bad public policy”. The point being avoiding gut feeling emotional reaction that may lead to worst outcome or even the opposite of what was intended. It can be good as a starting point, to evaluate if something needs to be done or change but It needs to be just that, a starting point that then goes on to be based on scientific and statistical data.
Although one of the parts lying is a really hard problem to solve in “one said the other said” situations there is a lot of scientific and statistical data to get to the policy of “Believing the woman”, "A drunk woman cannot consent " and so forth. The reason being, the data shows that rape is under reported, that the victim faces a number of challenges just go forward with an accusations and that it puts a lot of risks on the victim, they are ostracized, people tend to not believe in them, they say it is their fault, etc etc. The point being, the data points out that is really costly socially and personally for a victim of sexual assault to come forward and so is very unlikely that the person is lying. Also the data shows that there is very little cases of a someone lying of being victim of SA. And none of the appeal to believe the woman is law, the slogan is an appeal to have better policy for a starting point in an allegation, for the people coming forward to be treated seriously. No one is being convicted of rape based on a single unsubstantiated account.
I know that your point is about “what if both parties were drunk”, it is the same principle, same data.
Anyway,.I already talked too much, but I hope my hamblings made sense.
Yeah she was raped by those men. It wasn’t only because she was under the influence either.
Agreeing to sex with two men doesn’t mean she consented to a gang rape.
Didn’t say she wasn’t. The four that came in later were absolutely rapists.
But she willingly and voluntarily consented to sex with three men, then later claimed they raped her.
Were you there?
These are established facts. They are her own claims in her lawsuit. She consented to the first three but now feels like she wasn’t able to consent because she was intoxicated.