Anyone Else Following the Rape/Homosexual/Filthy Lost Virtue

[_Moniker]

You raise some good points.

Exactly where should the line be drawn as to when a girl should start taking responsibility for it? If she kisses a guy, and he rapes her, I don't see her as having any blame what-so-ever.

But, I don't know...there is just something in the back of my mind that says if a girl is going to act like she wants to have sex, and is leading the guy on like she is going to have sex with him, then doesn't...there is SOME responsibility on her part. A stripper isn't leading a guy on. There is a line and he should know where it is. The girl in my scenario has drawn no lines. The guy THINKS he is getting sex, and then she suddenly imposes a line.

So what if he thinks he is or may get sex? That's up to her.

Absolutely. However, does she share a micro....something of the blame?

No.

I'm not certain I know what you mean? Why wouldn't a man be able to stop? Are you seriously suggesting that the man loses all ability to stop in some instances? He may CHOOSE not to stop, yet, he always can stop. This is really somehow or another making the female responsible for his actions, Scottie. I give men more credit than this. Matter of fact I think this sort of thinking (not saying you do this personally -- just generally) goes back to LDS teachings with women wear certain clothes, women are temptresses and men are just predatory in nature. I don't think in those terms, at all and it seems odd, to me, to think of men as brutes that are incapable of resisting the charms of a female in a miniskirt or in the nude.

A man looking at a nude woman vs a girl doing all kinds of unspeakable acts to a guy and then expecting him to show immense levels of self control are two entirely different worlds.

Well, I don't know what an "unspeakable act" is, Scottie. I feel like we're running about in circles. I think the woman, after a line has been drawn, shares no responsibility in her victimization, at all. You think she does share a part in it. We're not going to agree on this.

Ok, lets add one more layer of complexity here. Say our hypothetical girl is attracted to the "bad boys". She is at a party, drinking and finds mr bad boy. Tattoo's, piercings, just got out of prison, etc. She takes him into the back room and starts to fool around with him. Teasing him, getting naked, performing all kinds of unspeakable acts. After things reach a certain point, she says no. He does it anyways. Is this girl absolved from all responsibility?

Haha! I like this one better: Our hypothetical girl is attracted to "good guys". She is at a party, drinking and finds mr. good guy. He's got some tattoos ('cause who doesn't -- they're trendy!), a few piercings (again a bit trendy), just got out of college, etc... She takes him to the back room and starts to fool around with him. They get naked, fondle each other, kiss, body friction and he makes movements that are a bit farther than she's willing to go at the moment -- or she asks him if he has a condom, etc... or he asks her if she's on the pill -- they can STOP -- BOTH of them have the ability to STOP at any point and the other one should stop.

What is up with the bad boy story? Haha. This is about judging lifestyles, a bit? I don't get that, at all.

Again, if the man right out of prison does not stop then she is absolved from all responsibility if she makes it clear to him that she wishes for him to stop.

Ok, so you think that a woman that pushes and pushes and pushes and pushes a man until he finally snaps and hits her is completely innocent of any wrongdoing????? Are you kidding me??? My God, are women accountable for ANYTHING in your world???

Why did you ask me if "woman are accountable for ANYTHING in your world?" Have I made any comments alluding to women in the wider world and what their responsibilities are? I think people should not violate others -- we each are responsible for our own actions and not violating others against their will.

[_karl61]

I think I know about the stopping issue since I've paid for sex so many times and when time is up then time is up whether you are done or not. It's not a life of joy but it's my experience.

[_SatanWasSetUp]

Well, of course she deserves to bear responsibility! I mean, what woman would dream of enjoying fondling, oral sex, making out and not expect for a man to rape her if she changes her mind? Phsaw -- she should know that men are incapable of understanding the word "no" and that she should never play with a man's genitalia without him turning into a hormone crazed ape that can't stop.

/snark borderline of being a bitch

A bit over dramatic, don't you think? I think I clearly stated that yes, it WAS rape.

So you think this girl should bear ZERO responsibility in this scenario? Not even a teensy eensy little bit??

Was it overdramatic? I don't think so? Why can't a woman enjoy fondling, oral sex, whatever the hell she wants with a willing partner? If the man penetrates her against her will (or whatever) without her consent as being partly her responsibility -- why? 'Cause she's responsible for him not controlling himself? How does that work? She got him so hot and heated that SHE is to blame for his actions??? She is responsible for herself not his actions. If she tells him to stop, he should.

A girl in a car makes out with a boy, maybe he gets a bit farther with each minute and finally when it comes time for penetration she's scared -- what responsibility does she share? She was enjoying herself! It felt good! She was excited -- yet, she decided somewhere along the line she was ready to stop. She shares NO responsibility in what HE does after she draws that line.

I think we're seeing a misunderstanding between female and male sexuality, because I originally agreed with Scottie that consentual fondling, oral sex, foreplay, etc. would put some responsibility on the girl, despite the fact that it is still date rape. But reading Moniker's replies I agree with her. Once the female says no, the party's over. Speaking for myself, there is not much difference sexually betwen oral sex and regular sex. Either way, my shaft is being pleasured and I'm getting my rocks off. But to a woman there is a big difference between pleasuring her man without penetration, and letting him penetrate her. As a man I have no idea why being penetrated is such an emotional thing for women, even if she will willingly do everything else. But every woman I've talked to says the same thing - there is a big difference between foreplay and penetration, and as men we need to understand that better.

[_Scottie]

The "teasers" are accountable for engaging in sexual behavior, of course. They are not accountable for being raped.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you here.

There is a HUGE difference between wearing skimpy outfits, making out and being a "lustful object" vs actively participating in getting a man to the breaking point and they claiming complete innocence when he can't take it anymore.

I get the feeling that women think that men are supposed to act with the utmost civility, no matter how inappropriate a woman acts towards them.

When I was in college, I was dating a girl and we were fooling around. We got naked and started doing naughty things. We got to the point where we were going to have sex, and she said no. I backed off. We layed there for a while and she started teasing again. Again, we got positioned to have sex when she said no. I suggested that we leave the bedroom and go do something else. She said she didn't want to, but she would stop, but could we just lay in bed and hold each other. I agreed. Well, not long after, she started up again. We got into the position AGAIN and she told me no AGAIN. This time I told her we HAVE to get out of bed and go do something. We did, and shortly afterwards broke up.

Now, had I been someone else and didn't stop, would you place any responsibility at all on this girl?

I don't know if you women can understand just how incredibly difficult it is to stop, especially when you are that far into it!! I get the feeling that women think it's just like a lightswitch that you can easily turn off.

[_beastie]

Scottie,

This woman would be responsible for the sexual acts she agreed to engage in. If she said "no" to sexual intercourse, she is not responsible for being raped.

No one is saying it's a light switch that can be turned off and on, and that it wouldn't be frustrating and difficult. I am saying that it is possible for a normal human being to STOP, no matter how hard and frustrating, when requested to STOP.

However, I'm sure that a jury would be more sympathetic to the rapist under this scenario than they would be to a rapist who drags a stranger off the street.

I'm not sure you understand how different fondling and fooling around is to a woman than actual intercourse. A woman can desire to fondle, fool around, and engage in various sexual acts outside actual intercourse, just like a man can. Are you saying that a woman has no right to fondle and fool around without having to accept sexual intercourse as the outcome?

[_Scottie]

I think you're right, Mon. We're not going to agree here.

I believe that women knowingly get themselves into situations where they may, and quite possibly will be raped. In these situations, I believe the woman shares in at least a microcosm of the blame.

If it EVER crosses a womans mind, "gosh, I probably shouldn't be here. I could get raped.", and of her own free will continues to be in that situation, then she shares a microcosm of the blame.

If a woman has a man in the bedroom, and is teasing him and she thinks, "He thinks I'm going to go all the way with him...well, I'll let him think that until riiiiiiiight before, then I'll pull the plug", she shares a microcosm of the blame.

[_Scottie]

Are you saying that a woman has no right to fondle and fool around without having to accept sexual intercourse as the outcome?

Of course I'm not saying that!!

I'll say it again. IT IS STILL RAPE. However, THE WOMAN IS NOT 100% BLAMELESS.

THIS is my point. Personally, I don't believe a woman can get a man to that point, and then say she is completely innocent.

Now, there are definate arbitrary lines that confuse the issue. Just how far is too far before she starts sharing in some of the blame? I don't know, but I know there are lines that a woman should know she shouldn't cross. If she crosses those lines, then how can you say she is innocent?

[_Alter Idem]

How can a rape victim or abuse victim have a "degree of responsibility"? Serious question. I'm wondering if someone can be considered a rape victim and also share in that responsibility? Wouldn't consent be required to share in the responsibility. At that point, isn't it no longer rape? I wonder if Scott is thinking of date rape, where a girl goes on a date thinking it's all innocent, but the guy thinks she's giving out signs that she wants sex. Maybe the Mormon church thinks that it's the girls responsibility to make sure she isn't giving out signs that the guy can misinterpret. I don't know, suggesting that the rape victim is somehow partly responsible seems old fashioned to me. Middle Eastern cultures have similar attitudes toward rape victims. It's a throw back to more barbaric times.

Ok, this is a tricky situation, so I'll try and be delicate.

I know of instances where a girl will willingfully make out, get naked, fondle, oral sex, etc, and when it gets too hot and heavy, says no, but it has gone too far and the guy just does it anyways.

Now, mind you, I believe that no means no. And the guy should have stopped. This IS rape.

But, does she bear some responsibility in this scenario? I say yes, she does.

I'm one of those who believes "no means no"; however, a person who is raped in this kind of a situation may have feelings of guilt they have to work through--and this person might need a professional or ecclesiastical leader's help. This may be one of the instances Elder Scott was thinking about in his first talk on sexual abuse.

Also, in some cases when little children are introduced to sexual behavior by an older child, they may not realize what they are doing is not right and even receive some sexual gratification from it. Later, when they understand it was wrong, they are conflicted with feelings of guilt--even if those guilty feelings are not warranted. This kind of person might also need to discuss the situation with a counselor or ecclesiastical leader to help them work through their conflicting emotions as a victim and as a participant--that is, if they are going to be able to fully put the abuse behind them and not have any lingering doubts or feelings of guilt.

I think Elder Scott's counsel from his first talk was misunderstood by many. I noticed that in his second talk on the subject in April 2008, he did not mention the abused person possibly needing to repent. In fact, I thought it was significant that he pointed out that an abuser can literally take away the agency of a victim, thus putting all the responsibility for the evil on the abuser--where it should belong.

[_beastie]

I'll say it again. IT IS STILL RAPE. However, THE WOMAN IS NOT 100% BLAMELESS.

So she's to blame for being raped?

THIS is my point. Personally, I don't believe a woman can get a man to that point, and then say she is completely innocent.

Now, there are definate arbitrary lines that confuse the issue. Just how far is too far before she starts sharing in some of the blame? I don't know, but I know there are lines that a woman should know she shouldn't cross. If she crosses those lines, then how can you say she is innocent?

Innocent of what? She is responsible for all the sexual behavior she agreed to.

Man, you are on one slippery slope right now. "There are lines that a woman should know she shouldn't cross." Just what are those lines? Who gets to determine those lines? And if the line is crossed, what then? She should expect to be raped?

Here's a suggestion: if a man knows he cannot control himself beyond a certain point, he ought not to go beyond that certain point himself.

[_Scottie]

I'm one of those who believes "no means no"; however, a person who is raped in this kind of a situation may have feelings of guilt they have to work through--and this person might need a professional or ecclesiastical leader's help. This may be one of the instances Elder Scott was thinking about in his first talk on sexual abuse.

Also, in some cases when little children are introduced to sexual behavior by an older child, they may not realize what they are doing is not right and even receive some sexual gratification from it. Later, when they understand it was wrong, they are conflicted with feelings of guilt--even if those guilty feelings are not warranted. This kind of person might also need to discuss the situation with a counselor or ecclesiastical leader to help them work through their conflicting emotions as a victim and as a participant--that is, if they are going to be able to fully put the abuse behind them and not have any lingering doubts or feelings of guilt.

I think Elder Scott's counsel from his first talk was misunderstood by many. I noticed that in his second talk on the subject in April 2008, he did not mention the abused person possibly needing to repent. In fact, I thought it was significant that he pointed out that an abuser can literally take away the agency of a victim, thus putting all the responsibility for the evil on the abuser--where it should belong.

I've heard similar things. And women, please let me know if this is at all incorrect.

I've heard that for some women, when they are raped, it still feels very good. I would imagine this would fall more until the date rape type of scenario, where you are already hot and heavy than a violent rape.

Anyways, a rape victim may think that they are supposed to hate every part of the rape, but since they had some pleasant sexual feeling during the rape, that somehow they are responsible for it or that it makes the rape less bad.

Again, this is just what I've heard (from my at the time wife...who heard it on Oprah, I believe), so if this is incorrect, please forgive me and correct me.