My mum the rapist apologist

2

Comments

  • zanelad
    zanelad Posts: 269
    In defence of the OPs mum (we're similar ages) on the subject of climate change, how do we know that it is not cyclical and not just down to humans.

    After all, what caused the ice age, and more importantly what caused the thaw that followed? We can't put that down to cheap flights and 4x4s

    Call me cynical but I feel we are blamed so that we can be taxed more.
  • smoggysteve
    smoggysteve Posts: 2,909
    Is persuing sex offenders any different from persuing nazi war criminals for their actions?

    It was a crime then and it is now so all those guilty should be brought to justice. The only regret is that society feels that acts like this were seen as acceptable at the time. But in the past so was to be able to rape ones wife because she would have been seen as property of the husband. We as a civilised race should not just brush known acts under the carpet and move on but seek out to punish those who offend.
  • drlodge
    drlodge Posts: 4,826
    bdu98252 wrote:
    The other end of the extreme is a boy and a girl have consensual sex when he is 16 and the girl is 15 within a relationship that they have had for a couple of years. Legally he is a statutory rapist and the girl has been raped. They may continue this into marriage and have kids and live happily ever after.

    It can't be rape if its consenual! Under age perhaps, rape - no.
    WyndyMilla Massive Attack | Rourke 953 | Condor Italia 531 Pro | Boardman CX Pro | DT Swiss RR440 Tubeless Wheels
    Find me on Strava
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    drlodge wrote:
    bdu98252 wrote:
    The other end of the extreme is a boy and a girl have consensual sex when he is 16 and the girl is 15 within a relationship that they have had for a couple of years. Legally he is a statutory rapist and the girl has been raped. They may continue this into marriage and have kids and live happily ever after.

    It can't be rape if its consenual! Under age perhaps, rape - no.

    Anyone under the age of consent by definition is unable to consent to having sex so it is defined as statutory rape.
  • smoggysteve
    smoggysteve Posts: 2,909
    Paulie W wrote:
    drlodge wrote:
    bdu98252 wrote:
    The other end of the extreme is a boy and a girl have consensual sex when he is 16 and the girl is 15 within a relationship that they have had for a couple of years. Legally he is a statutory rapist and the girl has been raped. They may continue this into marriage and have kids and live happily ever after.

    It can't be rape if its consenual! Under age perhaps, rape - no.

    Anyone under the age of consent by definition is unable to consent to having sex so it is defined as statutory rape.

    In my job, I have known cases of soldiers being charged with "statutory rape" for having a relationship with a recruit under training. Both were over the age of consent but because the soldier has a duty of care over the recruit its illegal. So even if both are consenting the law says no.
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    drlodge wrote:
    bdu98252 wrote:
    The other end of the extreme is a boy and a girl have consensual sex when he is 16 and the girl is 15 within a relationship that they have had for a couple of years. Legally he is a statutory rapist and the girl has been raped. They may continue this into marriage and have kids and live happily ever after.

    It can't be rape if its consenual! Under age perhaps, rape - no.

    So what age would you say that "rape" takes place then? 15yo? 12yo? perhaps 8yo? anyone at any age is capable of some form of "consent" the law is there to prevent abuse of children who by definition are incapable of giving informed consent

    your argument is used by paedophiles the world over.
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    The problem is, if we had a ruling that was point blank, no discretion etc etc almost every married man on this forum would be guilty of rape.
    Now before the haters try to argue with me, think about it.

    Lets use Mrs VTech as an example.

    I come home from a working trip and the sight of a fat middle aged man isn't what Mrs V really needs or in fact wants.
    I say "come on love, been away for a few days and need a portion" she says "bugger off fat boy, I'm tired" I then try by whatever means to convince her I'm worthy of a "portion" and the deed is done.

    Now by todays law, I have committed rape.

    I would guess every other male here has done too, so we need a medium.
    This was one of the reasons why a man has only recently been able to be charged with rape against his wife.

    Now if Mrs V really didn't want too I couldn't convince her otherwise but it is a different situation that someone trying it on with a vulnerable person.
    One of my friends deals with this for the local Police force and he tells me that the problem with such cases is A) women using it as a tool to get back at partners. B) women who go to them and then withdraw charges. C) women who are too scared to talk about it.

    In any circumstance there is no winners and trying to get a "medium" is almost impossible ?
    Living MY dream.
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    Maybe if you didn't refer to it as "needing a portion" you wouldn't need to, ahem, "convince" your wife. :lol::lol:
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    johnfinch wrote:
    Maybe if you didn't refer to it as "needing a portion" you wouldn't need to, ahem, "convince" your wife. :lol::lol:

    I think the wording isn't my issue to be honest :mrgreen:
    Living MY dream.
  • Majestic 12
    Majestic 12 Posts: 63
    VTech wrote:
    "come on love, been away for a few days and need a portion"

    ' Now what happened was.....

    jethro1.jpg
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    VTech wrote:
    One of my friends deals with this for the local Police force and he tells me that the problem with such cases is A) women using it as a tool to get back at partners. B) women who go to them and then withdraw charges. C) women who are too scared to talk about it.

    Let us for a moment imagine that this friend of yours is real - does he really place the primary emphasis on women using accusations of rape to get at their partners? Very few women are going to want to put themselves through the trauma involved with a rape investigation let alone any subsequent trial just to get at their husband or boyfriend. The real problem is that the vast majority of rapes go unreported and a significant majority of reported rapes never go to trial.
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    Back to the op s mum....
    yes I do think a lot of people share these views.

    JS maybe be guilty of all, some or none of the allegations, but there has been no trial and no guilty verdict... so whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty???? he has had no trial by his peers, so therefore is innocent - we may not like it or approve but this right is enshrined in many treaties and justice systems around the world.

    as for attitudes changing, when I was a teenager in the late 70s and early 80s, terms like jail bait were commonly used and as lads we all knew that 14 and 15yo's girls were out of reach... tbh the Police are more over stretched than they ever were, so imo now your more likely to get away with under age sex then ever before.

    As a society we like to delve into the past as it takes away the focus on the present, like sex trafficking, child abuse and slavery, crimes that are very much on the rise.

    as for what has caused climate change, it doesn't matter, its all too late!
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    Paulie W wrote:
    VTech wrote:
    One of my friends deals with this for the local Police force and he tells me that the problem with such cases is A) women using it as a tool to get back at partners. B) women who go to them and then withdraw charges. C) women who are too scared to talk about it.

    Let us for a moment imagine that this friend of yours is real - does he really place the primary emphasis on women using accusations of rape to get at their partners? Very few women are going to want to put themselves through the trauma involved with a rape investigation let alone any subsequent trial just to get at their husband or boyfriend. The real problem is that the vast majority of rapes go unreported and a significant majority of reported rapes never go to trial.


    Sadly its true and false rape claims are the single biggest problem in convictions.
    I never suggest he placed any emphasis on this fact, its just the way it is.
    Countless times women will cry rape as a way of "getting back at there man" and no matter how much you or the world would like to argue that with me, it doesn't stop it being true.

    Having said that, I think all legal cases should be secret until conviction because there are two sides, two people and we have a legal system for a reason.
    Living MY dream.
  • cornerblock
    cornerblock Posts: 3,228
    mamba80 wrote:
    Back to the op s mum....

    Indeed, oh.....nice try!
  • airbag
    airbag Posts: 201
    Zanelad wrote:
    In defence of the OPs mum (we're similar ages) on the subject of climate change, how do we know that it is not cyclical and not just down to humans.

    After all, what caused the ice age, and more importantly what caused the thaw that followed? We can't put that down to cheap flights and 4x4s

    Call me cynical but I feel we are blamed so that we can be taxed more.

    Why don't you actually make an effort to find out then?

    Call me cynical, but it's because you don't actually want to. You'd rather claim a conspiracy because you'd feel guilty otherwise.

    Which is actually very relevant to the OP. How would you feel if, in 50 years, fuel use is treated by wider culture the way greens want it to be? Can you really say you don't waste fuel and resources? 'Cos I do.

    Is "it was a different time" going to be a good excuse for you, and I, or not?

    I genuinely don't know.
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    VTech wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:
    VTech wrote:
    One of my friends deals with this for the local Police force and he tells me that the problem with such cases is A) women using it as a tool to get back at partners. B) women who go to them and then withdraw charges. C) women who are too scared to talk about it.

    Let us for a moment imagine that this friend of yours is real - does he really place the primary emphasis on women using accusations of rape to get at their partners? Very few women are going to want to put themselves through the trauma involved with a rape investigation let alone any subsequent trial just to get at their husband or boyfriend. The real problem is that the vast majority of rapes go unreported and a significant majority of reported rapes never go to trial.


    Sadly its true and false rape claims are the single biggest problem in convictions.
    I never suggest he placed any emphasis on this fact, its just the way it is.
    Countless times women will cry rape as a way of "getting back at there man" and no matter how much you or the world would like to argue that with me, it doesn't stop it being true.

    Having said that, I think all legal cases should be secret until conviction because there are two sides, two people and we have a legal system for a reason.

    What stops it being true is that it isn't true! Trust me I have more experience and knowledge of this field than you do. You really need to stop pretending/believing that you are the font of all knowldege in every field. This is something you simply believe and you are flat out wrong in your belief. You claim to have an acquaintance who supports this - though I very much doubt someone who is involved in rape investigation would ever make the statements you've suggested.
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    Climate Change is caused by my house"mate"'s poxy little fan heater. The irresponsible goon!
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    Paulie W wrote:
    VTech wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:
    VTech wrote:
    One of my friends deals with this for the local Police force and he tells me that the problem with such cases is A) women using it as a tool to get back at partners. B) women who go to them and then withdraw charges. C) women who are too scared to talk about it.

    Let us for a moment imagine that this friend of yours is real - does he really place the primary emphasis on women using accusations of rape to get at their partners? Very few women are going to want to put themselves through the trauma involved with a rape investigation let alone any subsequent trial just to get at their husband or boyfriend. The real problem is that the vast majority of rapes go unreported and a significant majority of reported rapes never go to trial.


    Sadly its true and false rape claims are the single biggest problem in convictions.
    I never suggest he placed any emphasis on this fact, its just the way it is.
    Countless times women will cry rape as a way of "getting back at there man" and no matter how much you or the world would like to argue that with me, it doesn't stop it being true.

    Having said that, I think all legal cases should be secret until conviction because there are two sides, two people and we have a legal system for a reason.

    What stops it being true is that it isn't true! Trust me I have more experience and knowledge of this field than you do. You really need to stop pretending/believing that you are the font of all knowldege in every field. This is something you simply believe and you are flat out wrong in your belief. You claim to have an acquaintance who supports this - though I very much doubt someone who is involved in rape investigation would ever make the statements you've suggested.

    OK, ill play along with you here, are you telling me and the rest of the forum that false claims are not a huge factor in rape cases dealt with my the various police forces ?
    A yes or no will suffice.
    Living MY dream.
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    VTech wrote:

    OK, ill play along with you here, are you telling me and the rest of the forum that false claims are not a huge factor in rape cases dealt with my the various police forces ?
    A yes or no will suffice.

    Yes, that's what I'm saying. I've been involved in research projects that have spoken directly to women who 'claim' to have been raped, sampled through Sexual Assualt Referral Centres - a lot of women dont even make it to a SARC (or if you accept what used to be called the British Crime Survey even to making an accusation) but a significant percentage of those who do dont take it any further because of what they've already had to go through - examination through a SARC is pretty traumatic. A small percentage of reported rapes go to trial not because many are false accusations but because the system at various points conspires to put women off progressing the accusation.

    And while we're here have a look at this: http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/ ... spotlight/
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    Paulie W wrote:
    VTech wrote:

    OK, ill play along with you here, are you telling me and the rest of the forum that false claims are not a huge factor in rape cases dealt with my the various police forces ?
    A yes or no will suffice.

    Yes, that's what I'm saying. I've been involved in research projects that have spoken directly to women who 'claim' to have been raped, sampled through Sexual Assualt Referral Centres - a lot of women dont even make it to a SARC (or if you accept what used to be called the British Crime Survey even to making an accusation) but a significant percentage of those who do dont take it any further because of what they've already had to go through - examination through a SARC is pretty traumatic. A small percentage of reported rapes go to trial not because many are false accusations but because the system at various points conspires to put women off progressing the accusation.

    Thank you for the reply.

    Now here was my ORIGINAL comment, can you confirm that what I wrote was wrong ?

    One of my friends deals with this for the local Police force and he tells me that the problem with such cases is A) women using it as a tool to get back at partners. B) women who go to them and then withdraw charges. C) women who are too scared to talk about it.

    In any circumstance there is no winners and trying to get a "medium" is almost impossible ?
    Living MY dream.
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    VTech wrote:

    Thank you for the reply.

    Now here was my ORIGINAL comment, can you confirm that what I wrote was wrong ?

    One of my friends deals with this for the local Police force and he tells me that the problem with such cases is A) women using it as a tool to get back at partners. B) women who go to them and then withdraw charges. C) women who are too scared to talk about it.

    In any circumstance there is no winners and trying to get a "medium" is almost impossible ?

    Yes. (A) shouldnt be there because it is not a significant problem see: http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/ ... spotlight/. By inlcuding it and placing it at the head of the list you at least imply it is a major problem (a point you have made more explicitly subsequently).
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    I am shocked at your response.

    So to get this right.

    Women don't cry rape to get back at partners.

    I can't agree, factually I can't agree.
    I think due to the fact that you work with such cases and that you picked this point to argue with me against I find it understandable why cases break down. I will stress that in no way do I condone rape although in the strict terms of modern law I would be seen as guilty as most men in a relationship would be. You didn't reply on B or C either.
    Living MY dream.
  • sloppyschleckonds
    sloppyschleckonds Posts: 8,019
    VTech wrote:
    I will stress that in no way do I condone rape although in the strict terms of modern law I would be seen as guilty as most men in a relationship would be.

    Whut?

    Oh yeah this is your view of a convicted rapist:
    VTech wrote:
    Absolutely love Tyson. Have met him a few times now and is wonderful company.
    I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    SloppySchleckonds wrote:
    VTech wrote:
    I will stress that in no way do I condone rape although in the strict terms of modern law I would be seen as guilty as most men in a relationship would be.

    Whut?

    Oh yeah this is your view of a convicted rapist:
    VTech wrote:
    Absolutely love Tyson. Have met him a few times now and is wonderful company.


    Your find is very good and supports my theory completely.
    The woman in question had sex with tyson in the back of the limo on the way to the hotel, she then dropped to her knees in the lift with the bellhop in there with them.
    She then "refused" to have sex with him when in the hotel room.

    In the UK he would never have been found guilty, I doubt he is.
    Living MY dream.
  • smoggysteve
    smoggysteve Posts: 2,909
    VTech wrote:
    SloppySchleckonds wrote:
    VTech wrote:
    I will stress that in no way do I condone rape although in the strict terms of modern law I would be seen as guilty as most men in a relationship would be.

    Whut?

    Oh yeah this is your view of a convicted rapist:
    VTech wrote:
    Absolutely love Tyson. Have met him a few times now and is wonderful company.


    Your find is very good and supports my theory completely.
    The woman in question had sex with tyson in the back of the limo on the way to the hotel, she then dropped to her knees in the lift with the bellhop in there with them.
    She then "refused" to have sex with him when in the hotel room.

    In the UK he would never have been found guilty, I doubt he is.

    So, are you suggesting that he isn't guilty because she changed her mind after already having sex and said no, but because they already had sex its ok? If she says no it means no. He can't just decide that since he already started he can carry on without permission.
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    SmoggySteve wrote:
    VTech wrote:
    SloppySchleckonds wrote:
    VTech wrote:
    I will stress that in no way do I condone rape although in the strict terms of modern law I would be seen as guilty as most men in a relationship would be.

    Whut?

    Oh yeah this is your view of a convicted rapist:
    VTech wrote:
    Absolutely love Tyson. Have met him a few times now and is wonderful company.


    Your find is very good and supports my theory completely.
    The woman in question had sex with tyson in the back of the limo on the way to the hotel, she then dropped to her knees in the lift with the bellhop in there with them.
    She then "refused" to have sex with him when in the hotel room.

    In the UK he would never have been found guilty, I doubt he is.

    So, are you suggesting that he isn't guilty because she changed her mind after already having sex and said no, but because they already had sex its ok? If she says no it means no. He can't just decide that since he already started he can carry on without permission.


    No, I'm saying it is highly unlikely he raped her based on her previous actions having only just met him and blatantly had sex and given oral. She was portrayed as a beauty queen to the jury and of purity, this wasn't true. She was very loose and in the UK if that were known it would be doubtful a conviction would follow.
    Living MY dream.
  • nathancom
    nathancom Posts: 1,567
    He got found guilty beyond reasonable doubt by a jury of 12. Dershowitz, of OJ fame, failed to get him off on appeal despite spreading a lot of muck about the victim. She was an 18 year old girl and has the right to say 'no' at any point and for that not to be respected is rape.
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    nathancom wrote:
    He got found guilty beyond reasonable doubt by a jury of 12. Dershowitz, of OJ fame, failed to get him off on appeal despite spreading a lot of muck about the victim. She was an 18 year old girl and has the right to say 'no' at any point and for that not to be respected is rape.


    Your in the legal industry, you don't think she was lying ?
    Do you think a guilty would have been given in the UK ?

    This is a serious question, I'm definitely not looking for an argument.
    Living MY dream.
  • nathancom
    nathancom Posts: 1,567
    I'm not in the legal industry, however, why wouldn't he be found guilty in UK? Previous consent to sex does not mean consent is implied in all future events, otherwise rape in marriage would still not be a crime.

    It is remarkable that it was only during our lifetime that it became a crime for a man to rape his wife. Prior to this a woman had no protection in law from sexual violence in the home. Even as late as 1984, the Criminal Law revision committee had this to say
    The majority of us ... believe that rape cannot be considered in the abstract as merely 'sexual intercourse without consent'. The circumstances of rape may be peculiarly grave. This feature is not present in the case of a husband and wife cohabiting with each other when an act of sexual intercourse occurs without the wife's consent. They may well have had sexual intercourse regularly before the act in question and, because a sexual relationship may involve a degree of compromise, she may sometimes have agreed only with some reluctance to such intercourse. Should he go further and force her to have sexual intercourse without her consent, this may evidence a failure of the marital relationship. But it is far from being the 'unique' and 'grave' offence described earlier. Where the husband goes so far as to cause injury, there are available a number of offences against the person with which he may be charged, but the gravamen of the husband's conduct is the injury he has caused not the sexual intercourse he has forced.

    Was Tyson's imposition of sex on an 18 year old simply a failure of their sexual relationship and therefore excusable on the grounds that prior sexual activity had occurred. Clearly not.

    Women have suffered long enough from sexual violence and from the various excuses that are given to justify acts of sexual violence and to blame women for the failure for rape convictions is both unfair on the victims and in many ways a free pass for the perpetrators who know they are likely to evade justice in the majority of circumstances.
  • VTech
    VTech Posts: 4,736
    nathancom wrote:
    I'm not in the legal industry, however, why wouldn't he be found guilty in UK? Previous consent to sex does not mean consent is implied in all future events, otherwise rape in marriage would still not be a crime.

    It is remarkable that it was only during our lifetime that it became a crime for a man to rape his wife. Prior to this a woman had no protection in law from sexual violence in the home. Even as late as 1984, the Criminal Law revision committee had this to say
    The majority of us ... believe that rape cannot be considered in the abstract as merely 'sexual intercourse without consent'. The circumstances of rape may be peculiarly grave. This feature is not present in the case of a husband and wife cohabiting with each other when an act of sexual intercourse occurs without the wife's consent. They may well have had sexual intercourse regularly before the act in question and, because a sexual relationship may involve a degree of compromise, she may sometimes have agreed only with some reluctance to such intercourse. Should he go further and force her to have sexual intercourse without her consent, this may evidence a failure of the marital relationship. But it is far from being the 'unique' and 'grave' offence described earlier. Where the husband goes so far as to cause injury, there are available a number of offences against the person with which he may be charged, but the gravamen of the husband's conduct is the injury he has caused not the sexual intercourse he has forced.

    Was Tyson's imposition of sex on an 18 year old simply a failure of their sexual relationship and therefore excusable on the grounds that prior sexual activity had occurred. Clearly not.

    Women have suffered long enough from sexual violence and from the various excuses that are given to justify acts of sexual violence and to blame women for the failure for rape convictions is both unfair on the victims and in many ways a free pass for the perpetrators who know they are likely to evade justice in the majority of circumstances.

    Ill ask again, do you think tyson would have been found guilty if tried in the UK ?

    There is a lot about this and even a tv documentary hence the question.
    Living MY dream.

Categories