Guy kicked out of college for having sex with a woman!!!

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Among the key pieces of evidence that John and his legal team are relying on are two text messages that Jane had sent before going to John's room, one to him asking if he had a condom and another to a friend from her hometown saying "I'mgoingtohave sex now" (sic).

"The thing is I have no clue what I was thinking," Jane later told investigators. "I would never have done that if I had been sober … I don't know what was going through my head."



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/occidental-sexual-assault-2014-9#ixzz3EMKV1J30

Two drunk people have consensual sex. The man is blamed for this and gets kicked out of college while the woman is treated like a victim.


I think this trivialises rape and damages actual victims of sexual assault.


Is this what extreme 'liberalism' and a certain type of feminism has brought to the world?

Mocha Joe

Your username is longer than the thread title. This trivialises usernames and actual people with normal length usernames.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Mocha Joe wrote: »

Your username is longer than the thread title. This trivialises usernames and actual people with normal length usernames.

Mocha (moth), a European moth of the Geometridae family; its scientific name is Cyclophora annularia.

Joe (magazine), periodical developed originally for Kenyan youth.

To be fair I would never trivialise your username.

Mr. Incognito

They got drunk. She texted him to ask if he had a condom then called to his and accused him of sexual assault after because she couldnt remember?

If you replace it with cake.

Hey, do you have cake? Texts her friend, i am going to johns to have cake. Goes to Johns to have cake and the next day blames John for her having cake.

This woman needs to learn some personal responsibility.

I think that this guy doesnt deserve this permanent stigma

Fr_Dougal

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

Two drunk people have consensual sex. The man is blamed for this and gets kicked out of college while the woman is treated like a victim.


I think this trivialises rape and damages actual victims of sexual assault.


Is this what extreme 'liberalism' and a certain type of feminism has brought to the world?

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

omahaid

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

Does that mean a drunk woman shouldn't be allowed have sex for her own protection?

looking_around

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

That's what needs to change.

He was drunk too, surely this is "unconsented" consentual sex.

People need to just cop on, they chose to drink, if they wanted to be in control of their choices, they need to drink less.

both are at fault, here.
__
@OP, I also agree, this trivialises rape.
This was not rape. It was 2 drunk people, doing something they now regret. This is stupidity and both knew they were likely to do something stupid, by getting p!ssed.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

So if I have a few bottles of wine with my girlfriend and we mess around she cannot consent to anything we then do?

I'm at the mercy of her 'goodwill' that I won't be publicly accused of being a rapist!

Is that the logic here?

WhatNowForUs?

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

They can with an object.

shruikan2553

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

So if I have a few bottles of wine with my girlfriend and we mess around she cannot consent to anything we then do?

I'm at the mercy of her 'goodwill' that I won't be publicly accused of being a rapist!

Is that the logic here?

Pretty much. Its not the first time a girl gets drunk and regrets having sex or doesn't remember it so claims she was raped.

jamo2oo9

All I see is a woman who had sex with a guy and the morning after, she was ultimately embarrassed so she decided to call it sexual assault to alleviate her embarrassment....

DaveDaRave

I find it offensive that this stuff even makes it to trial.

K4t

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

Yeah but it's not a legal issue till one or more persons choose to make it one. A drunk person can give consent to have sex.

karl99

That's just ridiculous, a real case of blame the man for the mistake of both parties !

Shakespeare's Sister

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

Is this what extreme 'liberalism' and a certain type of feminism has brought to the world?

I don't know that the idea of the woman as always the victim is due to liberalism/feminism. Could be wrong though. I know some feminism certainly perpetuates it, but not sure that it created it. If anything, it's a conservative/traditional notion.

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent.

Surely there's a scale? Drunk can mean giggly and slurry and goofy all the way to passed out and crumped in a heap. The latter is obviously the state of a person who cannot give consent, but I don't know about the first one.

Banjo String

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man .

They can physically though. You can bet your ass on that.

Tigger

I've had women turn up knowing I've got a girlfriend turn up with a bottle of Jack and after the bottle was drank we did the bad thing

All in all I regretted it but I'm pretty sure at some point I sorta consented
Now it turns out I was raped

genericguy

WhatNowForUs? wrote: »

They can with an object.

Nice.

Fr_Dougal

K4t wrote: »

Yeah but it's not a legal issue till one or more persons choose to make it one. A drunk person can give consent to have sex.

Apparently, legally you can't give consent. Totally ridiculous, but there you go.

woodoo

Thats pretty ridiculous. I feel sorry for the guy. Its quite obvious it was consensual and she must know the effect it would have on his life if she decides to call it rape. Nasty bitch.

krudler

woodoo wrote: »

Thats pretty ridiculous. I feel sorry for the guy. Its quite obvious it was consensual and she must know the effect it would have on his life if she decides to call it rape. Nasty bitch.

It's a shitty situation alright, she was too drunk to remember giving consent but he was equally drunk so it's a big grey area. It's never a good idea to get it on with someone paralytic drunk but if you're that bad as well then your judgement is equally as impaired as hers. If it was a case of she was pissed and he was sober then ok that's clear cut taking advantage, but both people bladdered to the point of nearly blacking out? big can of worms.

alias no.9

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

How far can this incapacity to consent be extended? For example if a drunk driver agrees to blow into a breathalyser and registers a positive reading, should that automatically be inadmissible as evidence since it was, by default, taken without their consent?

wp_rathead

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

They got drunk. She texted him to ask if he had a condom then called to his and accused him of sexual assault after because she couldnt remember?

If you replace it with cake.

Hey, do you have cake? Texts her friend, i am going to johns to have cake. Goes to Johns to have cake and the next day blames John for her having cake.

This woman needs to learn some personal responsibility.

I think that this guy doesnt deserve this permanent stigma

SligoQueries

Recently a woman was arrested for raping herself. Apparently, she got real drunk, felt lonely, and fooled around with a couple of dildos. In the backdoor, dp, the lot. In the morning, she realised she couldn't possibly have gave herself consent to do that, and called the cops. She's on the Self-offending Sex Offenders list.

Penny Tration

Some of the 'jokes' are very unfunny.

People are saying that a woman cannot legally give consent if drunk.

It's not quite so clear cut. Under the influence of alcohol, you CAN give consent. So if you're having a few bottles of wine or beer with your OH, and do the deed after, it's not rape.

It's rape (under current laws), if the woman cannot give informed consent. So, if she's paralytic, blacks out, puking, can't remember the next day - they're all clear signs she can't/couldn't give informed consent.

However, I agree that the law is totally unfair to men. If the man in question was sober, then yah, he ttook advantage. But it seems that he was equally drunk, so considering his own intellect was impacted upon by alcohol consumption, how the hell was he to know that the woman wasn't giving informed consent?

Sh1tbag OToole

Shouldbekickedoutofcollege for not using spaces

hatrickpatrick

It's cases exactly like this one which make me automatically question rape stats, especially as they pertain to colleges. If this kind of bollocks is routinely included in such statistics, they are a complete waste and prove nothing except that some people love to blame everyone else for their own mistakes.

Wibbs

TheZohan wrote: »

Apparently, legally you can't give consent. Totally ridiculous, but there you go.

Which does open up the question of personal responsibility in other areas. IE if you're drunk and someone suggests you drive a car could you be exonerated because you were drunk and therefore couldn't give real consent? Like hell you would be. And rightly.

In this case I'd say GTFO you silly cow and the environment she operates in that takes this guff seriously.

He was drunk too apparently so why doesn't he call "rape"? Apparenty he couldn't give consent either. But oh wait... the man is always at fault and the woman is always a victim.

That's the beaut in these scenarios, the man not only has to take responsibility for his actions, he also has to take responsibility for hers. Basically she's absolved because she's got internal gonads and therefore apparently has no responsibility or agency over her actions. Nice one you daft third wave feminists with your BS, you've just stuck women back in the 19th century. You've made them children who can't have responsibility, or that is diminished because of their gender. Ironic and moronic in equal measure.

Thank christ the majority of women don't buy into this bullshít, but too much of the mainstream is.

The tragedy and joke is this poor bastard has been kicked out of university. Even though she went to him and fcuked him willingly(and her texts prove this), but because she has a change of heart and can blame diminished responsibility(because of her gender), he loses out and his life is potentially if not actually ruined. He can kiss goodbye to another US college looking at him for a start.

hatrickpatrick

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

That's the part that needs to be changed. Legally, rape should be having sex with someone without their consent. The law should be 100% gender neutral - as indeed should the entire statute book.

cork2

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent. Legally; a woman can not rape a man.

Definitely a law made by a woman!

Penny Tration

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's cases exactly like this one which make me automatically question rape stats, especially as they pertain to colleges. If this kind of bollocks is routinely included in such statistics, they are a complete waste and prove nothing except that some people love to blame everyone else for their own mistakes.

With regards to colleges, can't comment.

In general, rape stats in Ireland aren't really impacted by this kind of rape case. They're few and far between, as far as convictions go.

Shakespeare's Sister

cork2 wrote: »

Definitely a law made by a woman!

"Definitely"? Bet you it was made by a man actually.

Sand

Wibbs wrote: »

That's the beaut in these scenarios, the man not only has to take responsibility for his actions, he also has to take responsibility for hers. Basically she's absolved because she's got internal gonads and therefore apparently has no responsibility or agency over her actions. Nice one you daft third wave feminists with your BS, you've just stuck women back in the 19th century. You've made them children who can't have responsibility, or that is diminished because of their gender. Ironic and moronic in equal measure.

This. The ironic inference is that women, legally and apparently socially, are held to be less responsible than a man by virtue of their gender. At a time when women are campaigning for rights over their own bodies, they apparently still need to rely on a man (who is as drunk, or even drunker than them) to decide what they actually think or should do.

It's a very unjust case, and undermines a lot of the scary rape claims coming out of US colleges if the definition for rape is set as low as the girl regretting having consensual sex weeks later.

Wibbs

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's cases exactly like this one which make me automatically question rape stats, especially as they pertain to colleges.

You and everyone else should question them because they're essentially a complete and utter nonsense. The "1 in 4" stat bandied about is based on a "study" back in the 1980's that even the most crosseyed gobshíte would see was a nonsense. Apparently there are too many crosseyed gobshítes who buy into it.

The study in question told women they had been raped, even though the majority didn't consider it so and most of the "raped" continued to go out with and sleep with their "rapists". Akin to the Guards showing up to your gaff and telling you you've been burgled because a mate of yours was invited in and you gave him a loan of a CD. You denying that it was a burglary would be ignored. Clearly you were burgled.

In short it was some 1970's stylee retarded rad fem ballsology that wanted to set out and prove what it already believed. Yet that "1 in 4"(sometimes 1 in 3) stat is repeated ad nauseam today and policy is based on it, particularly in US colleges.

The joke is that the same colleges because of an actual brutal rape that occurred in the early 80's have to keep very detailed records and what those records show is the stats for rape in US colleges are equal to or slightly below the stats of the wider society. The figure? More like 1 in 250. Just a bit of a diff.

I'm sorry, actual rape, whether it by someone you know(the majority) or a stranger is not something someone would be bloody well confused about. You'd bloody well know it and I've personally seen the fallout of that with a good friend of mine who was raped by an utter scumbag ex boyfriend of hers.

This shíte and shíte like some loon calling "rape culture" because of some dickhead "joke" or because there are scantily clad women in an advert makes the word rape lose its meaning. It diminishes the true and horrific life changing crime and that's plain fúcking wrong. Keep at it rad fems, keep crying wolf to get attention for your nonsense and make the real crime even harder to discover and more, punish.

TL;DR? Nonsense and if I were him I'd sue the university until they bled out.

Wibbs

cork2 wrote: »

Definitely a law made by a woman!

Nope, afraid not. You can't blame women there. Not even close. Most definitely a law made by men. "Shure how could a laydee rape a man? That's not possible like".

Sand

I'm pretty sure I recall a case of a woman being done for sexual assault of a man (IIRC, a man passed out on a couch at a party - some woman who decided she would entertain the rest of the guests by performing sexual acts on him. He woke up and was not pleased). But I think rape is usually defined in such a way in the lawbooks that only a man can carry it out.

Nomis21

green_screen wrote: »

Some of the 'jokes' are very unfunny.

People are saying that a woman cannot legally give consent if drunk.

It's not quite so clear cut. Under the influence of alcohol, you CAN give consent. So if you're having a few bottles of wine or beer with your OH, and do the deed after, it's not rape.

It's rape (under current laws), if the woman cannot give informed consent. So, if she's paralytic, blacks out, puking, can't remember the next day - they're all clear signs she can't/couldn't give informed consent.

However, I agree that the law is totally unfair to men. If the man in question was sober, then yah, he ttook advantage. But it seems that he was equally drunk, so considering his own intellect was impacted upon by alcohol consumption, how the hell was he to know that the woman wasn't giving informed consent?

The law is unfair to men in theory but in practice only a small number of rape prosecutions lead to a conviction

Potatoeman

green_screen wrote: »

Some of the 'jokes' are very unfunny.

People are saying that a woman cannot legally give consent if drunk.

It's not quite so clear cut. Under the influence of alcohol, you CAN give consent. So if you're having a few bottles of wine or beer with your OH, and do the deed after, it's not rape.

It's rape (under current laws), if the woman cannot give informed consent. So, if she's paralytic, blacks out, puking, can't remember the next day - they're all clear signs she can't/couldn't give informed consent.

However, I agree that the law is totally unfair to men. If the man in question was sober, then yah, he ttook advantage. But it seems that he was equally drunk, so considering his own intellect was impacted upon by alcohol consumption, how the hell was he to know that the woman wasn't giving informed consent?

Even if he was sober in this case she turned up at his door and also texted a friend to say she was doing it. So she clearly had intent.

Sand

Actually - there is a case of a woman being convicted of rape, for her part in a gang rape. I guess it's just extremely rare to convict a girl of it, and it still relies on having male accomplices.

krudler

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope, afraid not. You can't blame women there. Not even close. Most definitely a law made by men. "Shure how could a laydee rape a man? That's not possible like".

It's very possible, I doubt there's a guy who hasn't woken up with a raging boner that's probably been there longer than he's been conscious.

Wibbs

Aye and women have been charged and convicted of sexual assault before. IIRC there was a case here in Ireland where a lesbian was convicted of sexually assaulting a woman, in a night club toilet IIRC?

Fr_Dougal

Sand wrote: »

Actually - there is a case of a woman being convicted of rape, for her part in a gang rape. I guess it's just extremely rare to convict a girl of it, and it still relies on having male accomplices.

Gang rape of another female, not a male. Women can be convicted of raping other women.

krudler

TheZohan wrote: »

Gang rape of another female, not a male. Women can be convicted of raping other women.

That's weird, is it because of the penetrative aspect?

Frank Lee Midere

TheZohan wrote: »

A drunk person cannot give consent.

Where did you get that idea?

Plasid

Stupid in so many ways...

He can sue and will win, the university in question add themselves to the stupid pile...

Frank Lee Midere

green_screen wrote: »

Some of the 'jokes' are very unfunny.

People are saying that a woman cannot legally give consent if drunk.

It's not quite so clear cut. Under the influence of alcohol, you CAN give consent. So if you're having a few bottles of wine or beer with your OH, and do the deed after, it's not rape.

It's rape (under current laws), if the woman cannot give informed consent. So, if she's paralytic, blacks out, puking, can't remember the next day - they're all clear signs she can't/couldn't give informed consent.

However, I agree that the law is totally unfair to men. If the man in question was sober, then yah, he ttook advantage. But it seems that he was equally drunk, so considering his own intellect was impacted upon by alcohol consumption, how the hell was he to know that the woman wasn't giving informed consent?

Even a black out is dubious. That just means somebody can't remember something. Since that's not clear at the time to anybody else nor is the person acting any differently to any other drunk person it's not evidently non- consensual.

Frank Lee Midere

Universities think they are their own law to themselves. Not so.

Wibbs

Plasid wrote: »

Stupid in so many ways...

He can sue and will win, the university in question add themselves to the stupid pile...

Maybe, maybe not P. This mindset is all too well engrained and he might find it an uphill struggle even with her admission and texts. Basically he's guilty until proven innocent.

Shakespeare's Sister

krudler wrote: »

That's weird, is it because of the penetrative aspect?

Well yeh there's the view that rape is only = forcibly penetrating someone, which unfortunately excludes the other cases of people being forced to have sex against their will.

Wompa1

krudler wrote: »

It's a shitty situation alright, she was too drunk to remember giving consent but he was equally drunk so it's a big grey area. It's never a good idea to get it on with someone paralytic drunk

And with that sentence the Irish stopped pro-creating and died out like the Dinosaurs

Frank Lee Midere

Wibbs wrote: »

Maybe, maybe not P. This mindset is all too well engrained and he might find it an uphill struggle even with her admission and texts. Basically he's guilty until proven innocent.

Is American law on sexual consent really like this?

1) if two drunken people have sex the male is considered to have consented, the female is not considered to consent if inebriated.
2) the male regardless of how inebriated is expected to know the inebriation level of the female. She is considered to be too inebriated to have sex, he is not considered too inebriated to work how drunk she is; even though the exact levels of drunkeness are never spelt out. Someone could get very tipsy after 3 drinks if not used to it.

I don't think that's the law. It's what universities enforce but not statutory law. It goes against all kinds of principles of justice.