New UK Anti-Rape PSA

[johnny_7713]

I think there's a huge lack of discussion about what consent is, and how it works. Also a lot of dangerous and hugely problematic messages in movies, ads, etc. about what's acceptable or "normal" in hooking-up.
Just look at all the scenarios where a man flirting with a woman involves buying alcohol for her. A cultural meme in which getting a someone drunk is seen as a valid strategy for having sex with them is a serious problem.

Rapists who know exactly what they're doing also benefit from confusion about the meaning of rape, and attacking that confusion will help to undermine their strategies for getting away with it.

I've always seen a man buying a woman alcohol (at least if we're talking buying a drink here) as a form of ritual gift giving as it were. I buy alcohol for my friends, both male and female, all the time. They also buy alcohol for me all the time, without any of us having the intention of getting the others drunk. I agree that seeing intoxication as a valid 'seduction strategy' is highly problematic though.

[Choboman]

I have no direct experience on the topic, but am just thinking out loud.

I would imagine (though I have no direct experience) that date rape sometimes happens in due to poor communication. As others have posted, sexuality and flirting can be convoluted and confusing things. A person can say yes before they change their minds and later say no. They can say yes, and then change their minds, but not say no, and still not want it. But in that situation, will the guy always pick up on the girl's non-verbal cues? Particularly if they've both been drinking? What about if a girl is drunk (and therefore incapable of consent) but the guy doesn't realize how drunk she is and doesn't know that he shouldn't respond to her 'yes' because it's not a valid yes?

There are many cases of rape where the guy either ignore's the girl's wishes or engineers circumstances where the girl is unable to voice her wishes, and those are obviously rape. But I can at least imagine that sometimes rape can occur without the guy having any idea.

[gmalivuk]

Google 'rape definition'.

Google is good for a lot of things, but legal definitions apparently isn't one of them.

Yes, until recently woman were definitionally incapable of committing rape. This was changed, what, 2 months ago? That change hasn't permeated throughout all of our culture. This shouldn't be a shocking concept.

Were you somehow under the impression that the US Justice Department has a monopoly on legal definitions of rape? Do none of the dozens of states that place no restrictions on the genders of the involved parties count? How about other countries that changed their archaic definitions before two months ago?

And even if for some reason you insist on using a US federal definition (when discussing an ad in the UK), you *still* acknowledged that it changed a few months ago, but didn't let that stop you from posting the stupid shit you did.

OTOH, a cultural meme of sexual chasity where sexual inhibitions prevent oneself from having their desired level of sex without alcohol is also a serious problem.

What is this on the other hand of? Do you think people trying to reduce rape are all working to support this other meme? If someone is trying to dismantle the notion that getting someone drunk is a valid way to seek sex, then obviously that would also include dismantling the notion that one cannot have sex without alcohol. It's explicitly part of the same problem.

[CorruptUser]

OTOH, a cultural meme of sexual chasity where sexual inhibitions prevent oneself from having their desired level of sex without alcohol is also a serious problem.

What is this on the other hand of? Do you think people trying to reduce rape are all working to support this other meme? If someone is trying to dismantle the notion that getting someone drunk is a valid way to seek sex, then obviously that would also include dismantling the notion that one cannot have sex without alcohol. It's explicitly part of the same problem.

I don't think I've ever had carnal relations without alcohol involved. Not that I mean the women were drunk, I mean myself. I.e., certain psychological barriers that are easier to avoid while not sober. Basically, the '<explicative> on a pedestal' problem. I'm the guy that had attractive girls literally begging me to take their virginities and I turned them down. OK, relatively attractive, one girl, and I turned her down because of some weird notion of "my first time should be special", but still...

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

Yes, until recently woman were definitionally incapable of committing rape. This was changed, what, 2 months ago? That change hasn't permeated throughout all of our culture. This shouldn't be a shocking concept.

Were you somehow under the impression that the US Justice Department has a monopoly on legal definitions of rape?

And, to be clear, this was not a "legal definition" in that it was not an enforced definition of an offense. It was just the definition used by a statistical agency in combining crimes under various state laws.

[Deep_Thought]

About the Tube ad (Spoilered, because it's dragging the thread back a bit):

Spoiler:

Rugby ball, if you want to indicate some is tough, then Rugby is the sport to do that with in the UK. Even though football (soccer) is the more popular sport. Just as until recently there was an attitude of cricket being associated with fair play.

It's also a possibly odd/loaded choice of imagery given that Rugby players are sometimes stereotyped as being a bit, well, homoerotic, what with the scrums.

Real men can get raped

As a native English speaker, I find that much less awkward. But they may have intentionally made it sound really odd.

I find that costs it a lot of the impact though.

I'm a native English speaker too, and I thought the original phrasing was pretty weird. I would have put the 'can' in there.

I don't think I've ever had carnal relations without alcohol involved. Not that I mean the women were drunk, I mean myself. I.e., certain psychological barriers that are easier to avoid while not sober.

This is an aspect of UK/US culture that I think isn't talked about enough, and in some ways is quite sad. Many of us are so terrified of rejection/have other issues that without some "Dutch courage" even talking to the opposite sex is pretty difficult. I've been there too, including the turning-someone-down bit in similar circumstances. These days I've relaxed a lot and interacting with people sober isn't a problem.

[cjmcjmcjmcjm]

About the Tube ad (Spoilered, because it's dragging the thread back a bit):

Spoiler:

Rugby ball, if you want to indicate some is tough, then Rugby is the sport to do that with in the UK. Even though football (soccer) is the more popular sport. Just as until recently there was an attitude of cricket being associated with fair play.

It's also a possibly odd/loaded choice of imagery given that Rugby players are sometimes stereotyped as being a bit, well, homoerotic, what with the scrums.

Real men can get raped

As a native English speaker, I find that much less awkward. But they may have intentionally made it sound really odd.

I find that costs it a lot of the impact though.

I'm a native English speaker too, and I thought the original phrasing was pretty weird. I would have put the 'can' in there.

I don't think I've ever had carnal relations without alcohol involved. Not that I mean the women were drunk, I mean myself. I.e., certain psychological barriers that are easier to avoid while not sober.

This is an aspect of UK/US culture that I think isn't talked about enough, and in some ways is quite sad. Many of us are so terrified of rejection/have other issues that without some "Dutch courage" even talking to the opposite sex is pretty difficult. I've been there too, including the turning-someone-down bit in similar circumstances. These days I've relaxed a lot and interacting with people sober isn't a problem.

Making the problem more complicated is that in practice, drunk consent isn't so much no consent as it is revocable consent. If there's regret in the morning, it can turn from a stupid decision to date rape. However, if things went OK, then consent was assumed to happen. This is where things can get complicated. Sometimes, both partners just want bad drunk sex. Other times, not so much. For practicality's sake, there needs to be some reasonable expectation between simply assuming that nothing is different because a partner is drunk and going to the bail bondsman's shop to get breathalysed and get your consent forms notarized. Damn, people are complicated.

[gmalivuk]

How about we try and have a thread about rape that *doesn't* turn into a thread about just how drunk does she have to be before it's no longer okay to put my dick in her, mkay?

[Torchship]

How about we try and have a thread about rape that *doesn't* turn into a thread about just how drunk does she have to be before it's no longer okay to put my dick in her, mkay?

Why's that? I think the interaction between alcohol and consent is an extremely interesting issue that has never really been explored properly. From what I recall, last time the issue was raised seriously the thread was killed by basically this sentiment ("we don't want to talk about this issue any more") before any kind of consensus could be made. The issue does heavily relate to that of rape, and there are people here who wish to discuss the issue, so wouldn't this be the ideal location to discuss it?

Also: rah, rah, rah, hetero-normative terminology, rah, rah, rah. Bad gmalivuk, bad.

[gmalivuk]

How am I being heteronormative when I'm simply factually reporting the bullshit turn most threads related in any way to rape always seem to take?

And that's why we don't like to discuss it when it's a tangent to the original topic of a thread: because almost invariably that's *always* what people start wanting to discuss.

[Torchship]

And that's why we don't like to discuss it when it's a tangent to the original topic of a thread: because almost invariably that's *always* what people start wanting to discuss.

Tangents are a tradition on this forum; no-one complains when sourmilk drags a thread offtopic for a million pages, so I don't see why the off-topic-ness of this particular subject (which is significantly less off-topic than several other tangents which have been allowed to carry on unhindered recently) is exceptional in any way.
The problem is that these kind of threads always start, but I have yet to ever see one conclude. At least if the issue were thoroughly explored at least once, you could point to that thread so everyone interested in the issue could read that. As it is, the obvious interest that there is in discussing the issue of consent and alcohol has nowhere to go and earths itself in every available rape thread, which is probably the least optimal solution overall.

[gmalivuk]

Right. Because once we had an Israel/Palestine thread, no one ever argued about it in other threads. And once we had an abortion thread, that never came up where it was completely irrelevant, either.

And, as mentioned before, the tangent doesn't stay about an abstract consideration of how alcohol and consent relate to each other. It pretty much always boils down to person after person bringing up hypothetical edge cases and wanting to make sure those aren't *really* rape, even if N alcoholic beverages had just been consumed.

Which is to say, wanting to know just how drunk she has to be before it's no longer okay to put his dick into her.

[yurell]

The problem is that these kind of threads always start, but I have yet to ever see one conclude.

That's because all the new statements are said in the first couple of pages and the next ten are back-and-forth repetitions of those same arguments ... those threads never conclude, even if they remain unlocked by mods.

Right. Because once we had an Israel/Palestine thread, no one ever argued about it in other threads.

To be fair, whenever it does, we do exactly what Torchship is suggesting — point them towards the appropriate thread.

[The Mighty Thesaurus]

no-one complains when sourmilk drags a thread offtopic for a million pages

Oh, those of us who are truly free complain all the frigging time

[sourmìlk]

Even here people have been known to kvetch about that. But I sort of agree with Torchship, not necessarily with rape specifically, but with letting these discussions complete themselves, or at least providing a place for them to go on indefinitely. Mods will always close a thread down because the arguments have been said before, but that's because they have to be rehashed, as the argument is starting from the beginning. If there were a specific thread for these arguments, or if they were allowed to complete, things would only need to be said once, and the discussion could resolve. It's a vicious cycle: people make arguments that have already been stated because mods cut off threads containing those arguments because people make arguments that have already been stated etc...

Oh, those of us who are truly free complain all the frigging time

So glad people are ranting about be behind my back

Although, to be fair, I know I piss people off so it's probably best that you have a nice place to vent that.

[gmalivuk]

If it's a place new members can post, arguments probably won't complete and consensus won't be reached.

If it's a place you're allowed to post, arguments *definitely* won't complete.

[tzar1990]

Graph explaining why the discussion always turns towards "well, how drunk does she have to be?"

Spoiler:

[++$_]

Did you make that graphic? If so, can I steal it?

[Torchship]

Right. Because once we had an Israel/Palestine thread, no one ever argued about it in other threads. And once we had an abortion thread, that never came up where it was completely irrelevant, either.

But both threads did serve to decrease the amount of IvP/abortion discussion elsewhere, did they not? If an alcohol and consent thread is made, it can similarly concentrate the discussion in one place, where no-one else has to read it.

And, as mentioned before, the tangent doesn't stay about an abstract consideration of how alcohol and consent relate to each other. It pretty much always boils down to person after person bringing up hypothetical edge cases and wanting to make sure those aren't *really* rape, even if N alcoholic beverages had just been consumed.

I don't recall ever actually seeing this happen, so if you've got a link, that would be wonderful. In any event, the IvP equivalent of this is essentially what happens in the IvP thread (and the religion thread, and the abortion thread (to a lesser extent), etc, etc), so if it is acceptable for these threads to exist, why is it not acceptable for an alcohol and consent thread to exist?

But I sort of agree with Torchship, not necessarily with rape specifically, but with letting these discussions complete themselves, or at least providing a place for them to go on indefinitely.

I don't necessarily agree with allowing the thread to continue indefinitely; once the main arguments have been aired and been discussed thoroughly, then there is no more real reason for the thread to exist. Then again, maybe it will be valuable for the subject to be aired now and again, so the new generations can get it out of their systems.

[tzar1990]

Did you make that graphic? If so, can I steal it?

Go ahead! It was just a 10 minute job in MS paint, anyways.

[The Mighty Thesaurus]

So glad people are ranting about be behind my back

Although, to be fair, I know I piss people off so it's probably best that you have a nice place to vent that.

If it's behind your back, it's because you aren't facing forward. Also, it's mostly "man, this guy. This guy, man. Boy, I don't know. I just don't know, man. Boy." THIS IS A DIRECT QUOTE! Granted, I'm quoting what I'm saying to myself as I type this post, but I think that's fair enough.

[gmalivuk]

I don't necessarily agree with allowing the thread to continue indefinitely; once the main arguments have been aired and been discussed thoroughly, then there is no more real reason for the thread to exist. Then again, maybe it will be valuable for the subject to be aired now and again, so the new generations can get it out of their systems.

It doesn't get resolved. It doesn't conclude. It doesn't get out of anyone's systems. It just goes round and round and round with different versions of, "Well, what if she was this drunk? Am I a rapist then?"

But honestly, I can't stop you from creating a new thread on whatever topic you want. I will however continue getting on your case any time you or someone else insists on bringing up the topic yet again in threads where it isn't the fucking point.

[sourmìlk]

So glad people are ranting about be behind my back

Although, to be fair, I know I piss people off so it's probably best that you have a nice place to vent that.

If it's behind your back, it's because you aren't facing forward. Also, it's mostly "man, this guy. This guy, man. Boy, I don't know. I just don't know, man. Boy." THIS IS A DIRECT QUOTE! Granted, I'm quoting what I'm saying to myself as I type this post, but I think that's fair enough.

Eh, fair enough. Have fun.

I don't think that the Israel vs. Palestine thread is a fair example of how these kinds of large, nebulous, never ending argument threads would turn out because I frequent the Israel vs. Palestine thread, whereas I do not frequent the other ones so much.

[Torchship]

It doesn't get resolved. It doesn't conclude. It doesn't get out of anyone's systems. It just goes round and round and round with different versions of, "Well, what if she was this drunk? Am I a rapist then?"

But arguments continuing in perpetuity are clearly acceptable for the IvP and religion (and about a dozen other) threads, so why aren't they acceptable here?

But honestly, I can't stop you from creating a new thread on whatever topic you want. I will however continue getting on your case any time you or someone else insists on bringing up the topic yet again in threads where it isn't the fucking point.

...But you barely ever complain when a thread on a different topic goes offtopic. There are dozens of off-topic threads in N&A at this very moment that you have totally failed to 'get on the case' of. Hell, there are plenty of rape threads in the recent past that have drifted far more off-topic than alcohol and consent with nary a peep. Objecting to the off-topic nature of the discussion makes no sense considering your previous behaviour.

[sourmìlk]

From now on, I am interpreting any complaint about off-topic threads as a personal attack. How dare you single me out, Torcship!

[gmalivuk]

I'm objecting to this particular tangent because this particular tangent is one that *always* happens in rape discussions and it's one that *always* has undertones of skeezy people wondering how to maximize the amount of sex they can get by skating the line of too-drunk-to-consent.

[Princess Marzipan]

Torchship, it's due to the combination of it being off the original topic AND something that's derailed countless existing threads already. (gorram ninjagmal)

But why are you still arguing about this here, instead of creating a thread for the discussion you'd like to have?

[Torchship]

From now on, I am interpreting any complaint about off-topic threads as a personal attack. How dare you single me out, Torcship!

From now on, I'm interpreting any and all misspellings of my username as personal attacks. How dare you misspell my name, sourmalk!

But why are you still arguing about this here, instead of creating a thread for the discussion you'd like to have?

Vague fears of modly hammers and suchlike. However, since that's been cleaned up, that sounds like a capital idea.

[gmalivuk]

It's mod madness. Nothing whatsoever has been cleared up, except that I can't prevent you from starting a new thread and that I will continue harping on you if you try to turn existing threads into how-drunk-does-she-have-to-be discussions.

[Hawknc]

Here's your handy guide to continuing this discussion:

1) Go to SB, the correct space for discussion of hypotheticals not relevant to a particular news item
2) Search to see if this topic has already been discussed
3a) If it exists, read it
3b) If it doesn't, start one!

FIN.

[jakovasaur]

I literally could not have made myself any clearer directly above you. -Hawk

[gmalivuk]

Good job. Now go do what Hawk just said to do.

[jakovasaur]

That's really all I had to say on the topic.

Edit: Boo-hoo

[Princess Marzipan]

That's really all I had to say on the topic.

Edit: Boo-hoo

Nothing you said was on the topic.

[jakovasaur]

That's really all I had to say on the topic.

Edit: Boo-hoo

Nothing you said was on the topic.

To what topic are you referring?

[Hawknc]

The topic we're all now going back to, which is the one in the "Subject" field of every one of these posts.

[jakovasaur]

That's what I thought we were talking about.

[Princess Marzipan]

There are many cases of rape where the guy either ignore's the girl's wishes or engineers circumstances where the girl is unable to voice her wishes, and those are obviously rape. But I can at least imagine that sometimes rape can occur without the guy having any idea.

Thanks to male privilege, yes. This is why it's sooo bloody necessary to get people to understand that rape does not necessarily involve strangers, dark alleys, short skirts, or even physical violence. If you, yes YOU, make assumptions about what someone does or doesn't want you to do with their body, you, yes YOU, could get them wrong.

[sigsfried]

Thanks to male privilege, yes ...

Are you really saying that is something that only men get wrong? Maybe it is far more common for men to do it, but I have certainly been in situations where women (admittedly very drunk, so maybe that should excuse it to some extent as they probably weren't sober enough to consent to what they were doing) where trying to do things that had the situation been reversed would have been unquestionably sexual assault. I say if the sitaution was reversed because I don't feel like I experienced any real trauma so can't consider myself a victim of anything, no victim no crime is not perfect but can't be entirely ignored.

They certainly wouldn't have realised what they were doing was sexual assault.

[Princess Marzipan]

Thanks to male privilege, yes ...

Are you really saying that is something that only men get wrong?

Male privilege includes a sense of entitlement about sex, and a sense that women are obligated to provide sex in a relationship. Case in point: Reasons Women Withhold Sex.

Women don't have the entitlement and men don't have the obligation, so it's going to be much more difficult for a woman to unknowingly commit sexual assault.