Disabled woman's rapist acquitted......

[Renee750il]

The thing is, the case sets the stage for more people to be victimized.

The fact that there is one victim is a tragedy.

The ruling on the case and the message it sends is a travesty.

[Pops2]

after serious consideration, i have concluded it would be beneficial to the world at large if the judges in question were hit by a bus.

[Renee750il]

Originally Posted by Pops2

after serious consideration, i have concluded it would be beneficial to the world at large if the judges in question were hit by a bus.

Seriously.

In most instances, appellate judges are elected. Supreme Court judges are usually appointed from appellate courts.

Most voters have no clue about any of the candidates for the bench, nor do they make any effort. Most never even process the notion that they are going to be voting for judges until they're standing in front of the voting machine

[Miakoda]

Makes one wonder....if a woman/girl has been slipped GHB (or similar), or even is passed out drunk, is it not "rape" since she did not "fight back" even though she's been shown to have the ability to do so in general?

Personally, this a-hole needs to join the land of eunichs. And possibly some of those judges as well.

[Fran101]

Originally Posted by Miakoda

Makes one wonder....if a woman/girl has been slipped GHB (or similar), or even is passed out drunk, is it not "rape" since she did not "fight back" even though she's been shown to have the ability to do so in general?

I always understood that consent was SAYING YES.
Not "Not saying no"
Lack of negative response or obvious NO should not mean yes.

You bring up a good point.. what about passed out people? drugs? drunk?

Such victim shaming. Ugh.

but we do live in the world where we teach girls over and over and over and over "How to not get raped/Safety tips for parties etc..."
and forget to teach respect, consent, and things like, gee I dunno..NOT RAPING PEOPLE to boys.

[Pops2]

Originally Posted by Fran101

I always understood that consent was SAYING YES.
Not "Not saying no"
Lack of negative response or obvious NO should not mean yes.

You bring up a good point.. what about passed out people? drugs? drunk?

Such victim shaming. Ugh.

but we do live in the world where we teach girls over and over and over and over "How to not get raped/Safety tips for parties etc..."
and forget to teach respect, consent, and things like, gee I dunno..NOT RAPING PEOPLE to boys.

got the respect going, but i think it might be early to teach the boys no raping. seriously we have gone over the don't touch other peoples bodies. and while they don't fully understand, they do have the you don't hit girls & you don't bully girls & you don't allow anyone else to either. they have protected girls a couple of times & i have made sure to tell them how proud i am for them to stand up to bullies on the girls' behalf. so some of us are working hard to do just that Fran.

[Renee750il]

I think the main reason we don't teach boys "don't rape" is because it's incomprehensible that any reasonably sane, even marginally decent human being would be anything but appalled at the notion of raping someone.

For the most part, that's a true assumption.

On the rare occasions it isn't, no amount of drilling "don't rape" is likely to make a difference.

[release the hounds]

Originally Posted by Greenmagick

Exactly...and IMO thats why I think it fits "redefining" rape or narrowing what is "legitimate" rape. If she truly has the mental capabilities of a three year old...I dont care if she said YES, I would still consider it rape. But she didnt say yes...she just didnt fight like she does for known things that she does not like. There is a very good chance she was either confused by what was happening or too scared to "fight".

Anytime the victim gets blamed for not doing enough to fight the attacker off, for wearing the wrong clothes, for drinking too much, for being in a bar, for walking at night by herself, etc that is trying to make those rapes somehow not real, or not "legitimate".

Honestly, I posted the story not caring at all about that part of it, but about the actual case. Find it very sad that someone is seemingly more concerned about that then the woman who was raped

I find it sad you actually think that. People can look at an issue from a non emotional standpoint, and still feel compassion and empathy for those they've never met. Sorry for being able to separate the two.

If you would have read the link explaining the ruling, you'd find that half your reasons for making things "legitimate" or not are addressed already

[Greenmagick]

I can separate the two. I did not read the complete ruling as I was on my phone but I did read most of it and I still dont find how they came to their conclusion.

[sassafras]

Originally Posted by Renee750il

I think the main reason we don't teach boys "don't rape" is because it's incomprehensible that any reasonably sane, even marginally decent human being would be anything but appalled at the notion of raping someone.

For the most part, that's a true assumption.

You'd like to think so, huh? But maybe not.