Vitriol (and pain)

I was reading old blog posts on glensacks.com today and found this: http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1884.

I’m making an edit here. I came across pretty hard on Glenn Sacks in the first version of this, but really wanted to say that I like him, but disagree often. Now, keeping that in mind, here is the original paragraph (I believe in taking responsibility for my mistakes but also in correcting them). Now, I’m not a huge fan of Mr. Sacks, I feel he is sometimes too extreme, too conservative, too ready to accept the male point of view, however this one hit a couple of major trigger points for me.

A quick summary looks like this: There was a study that said that 28% of college women would be raped within their college years. There was a counter to that which said that number was much smaller and was exaggerated by including a lot of things that shouldn’t be construed as rape in that category (like drunken hook-ups). There was backlash against that saying that if a woman is too drunk to make a rational decision then any sex with her is rape…

As a man, I have always had a rule… I don’t hook up with drunk girls. I have broken this rule, but only when really drunk (which worked out pretty good last time. We have lived together for more than five years and are engaged). Most of my male friends follow similar rules. Now, none of the women I know follow anything close to those rules. If the guy is drinking, so be it. If he is conscious and not puking… then he is fair game. Does that mean I can cry rape for the times I have been the more inebriated party? Seriously… there are nights I barely remember from my teenage years and some of those nights included hook-ups and even the start of relationships. This isn’t to say that there aren’t men who take advantage of girls (due to the particular sub-culture I belonged to as a teenager I have had more than my fair share of encounters with unsavoury people, including some men who are in my opinion more than capable of sexual assault) but it isn’t most of us, and it isn’t most of the girls I used to know either. Look, it’s not blaming the victim if both parties were drunk and the man had every reason to believe that it was consensual (you know, she grabbed him, started kissing him, took off her clothes, never said anything remotely resembling no or gave any indication of the same). Hell, even by the modified standards for rape (force or inebriation) you can say that any guy who ever bought a girl a drink (or handed one to her) and then had sex with her was in fact guilty of rape. That is part of how the statistics get so blown up. Here is one great quote from one of the articles “It’s pretty amazing, to think that men can only commit rape when they intend to” (from this article on the curvature). If you have reached a point in your life where you believe that it is okay to punish a man who had every reason to believe he was having consensual sex, maybe you need to do some re-evaluation. As to her claims about forced sex… of course the majority of actual rapists deny it, and yes, forced sex and rape are the same thing, but the sampling of guys asked those questions are guys who have been charged with rape, not the general populace, making this an incredibly clear case of confirmation bias.

Now, let me tell you another story about attempted rape. When I was 15 I was in the lobby of a hotel. A man came up to me and started to say something incoherent. He was drooling and very drunk, but very large. He started to gesture to his crotch and using hand gestures make it obvious that he wanted me to give him a blow job. Not my cup of tea (even if I was gay I don’t think going down on a smelly drunk guy in a hotel lobby would do it for me) so I shook my head no. He whipped out a knife and held it to my throat. At that point, I had no idea what to do. All of my power was gone, I was trying to decide if I would rather die or comply. I was kind of leaning towards die. At that moment the hotel manager (I was friends with his children) came in and saw what was going on. He forced the man out of the hotel. I didn’t see what happened after that, but the manager called a couple of other guys and they didn’t come back in for a while. I went to the hotel bar and the manager decided to let me have a drink after he got back. This was the first of two incidents in my life. The second one found me with a large knife in my hands and my assailant deciding to get the fuck out of there before I used it.

I tell this story to a: let you know that I have a lot of sympathy for the damage caused by even an attempted rape… let alone one that is carried out to completion, and b: to attempt to put the idea of a drunk couple fucking in a realistic context. You may regret the hell out of the sex the next day, you may wish you had never met that person, but to put a drunken mistake in the same context as the real thing… it is insulting to actual victims.

There was also a party where the next morning I woke up to discover that girl I had no interest in was in the process of performing oral sex on me. I let her finish and then I got up for the day. Was I raped? Technically… yes, I never gave consent. Does it have the same impact as having a knife held to my throat? Not even close. In the one case, I put myself in the situation of being passed out drunk at a party, in the other I had no expectation whatsoever of risk. Now, I am wholeheartedly in favour of taking men who start having sex with unconscious women at a party and shooting (or at least castrating) them, but it still isn’t in the same class as the knife.

I think in the end, that the feminist movement is pushing back so far because of how far they were pushed in the first place, because things happened (and still happen) like a judge ruling that a woman who was wearing jeans couldn’t be raped because jeans are too hard to remove, or that a woman who has a history of sexual promiscuity is not to be believed when she claims rape (although from my perspective that women is probably the least likely to put in a false claim, as she didn’t the last whole bunch of times she had sex…) and I understand that, but fuck, it’s getting to the point where many men I know are terrified to have sex out of sheer terror at the prospect of a false accusation (something that contains virtually no penalties for the woman).

In the end we need to take a hard look at the whole thing, from the perspective of both genders, and deal with rapists as rapists while still dealing with innocent people as innocent. After all, your life is no less destroyed if you are falsely convicted of rape than if you are falsely convicted of murder, and it is far more common.


12 Responses to “Vitriol (and pain)”

  1. 1 Georgia Girl
    September 16, 2008 at 12:46 am

    Traverse, I’ve bookmarked your site, and look forward to reading the archives later.

    It is so interesting that you mentioned a girl in jeans who the judge deemed impossible of being raped because the “jeans” would have been too hard to remove.

    One of the things the rapist (gang rape leader) told me was “to wear pants” rather than a skirt. When he picked me up at my home for the date, he was visibly upset to find me in a skirt rather than pants (60’s era). I just laughed at his reaction, having no idea what was in store for me later that evening.


  2. 2 traversedaviestalksrubbish
    September 17, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    Traverse Davies, your comments are rubbish. You are oblivious to the seriousness of false accusations, yet you’re an apologist for sex change maimings. Traverse Davies, a boy can’t become a girl & a girl can’t become a boy. I believe that they must make it a crime to perform sex change maimings. GID is worse than homosexuality. Also my view as far as sex is that it’s either straight missionary activity or celibacy. I would support finding a cure for homosexuality & yes I see something wrong with men having sex with men & women having sex with women.

  3. September 17, 2008 at 4:55 pm

    Well, you and I are probably not going to see eye to eye anytime soon. I have no problem with sex change operations, many gay friends, a healthy interest in non-missionary positions sex (OK, you would probably say that interest is unhealthy) and a deep and abiding pity for you due to all the great stuff you are missing out on.
    Also, wondering how you got the idea that I thought false rape accusations were anything other than a crime or that I come even slightly close to believing that those who perpetrate them should not face severe consequences? Did I write something I am not aware of?
    Just for the record, I am completely straight but have no issues with those who are not.

  4. 4 traversedaviestalksrubbish
    September 17, 2008 at 5:11 pm

    Traverse Davies, I wouldn’t care so much for homos&lesbians if they didn’t push their views on others. But sadly, most homosexual groups do push their views on others. I’m against sex change maimings for the same reason that I’m against a Dr. whitening a Black person because he or she thinks they’re White instead of Black. What they must do is cure GID, not mutilate the patients to make them what they’re not. No Dr. should participate in such mutilations, which are a sad waste of science.

    With homosexuality, science has sadly lost neutrality on this issue. It’s noteworthy that most homosexual groups will say free will when it comes to engaging in straight sex activities, yet they’re against free will when it comes to repair therapy. What about the homosexuals&lesbians who want to be straight? Given that science has discovered cloning, they may eventually find the cure for homosexuality? If they eventually discover the cure for homosexuality, how many homos&lesbians would take the vaccine or pill to go straight? 1 can only speculate.

    Predictably, most of the same homo&lesbian groups who oppose repair therapy to treat homosexuality are apologists for sex change maimings. In other words, it’s wrong to do medical work to search for the cure for homosexuality, but mutilations are OK. Finally, Martina Navratilova needs to decide where she stands on animal rights. What I mean is that Martina Navratilova (the tennis legend) has protested experiments on gay sheep because of the possibility that such experiments may eventually find the cure for homosexuality. Yet Martina Navratilova has been oblivious to the issue of sex change maimings, which were initially done on animals. Incidentally, sex change maimings are medically harmful. The lifetime of hormones which a transexual takes will breakdown the body. If Martina Navratilova truly cares about animal rights & welfare as she alleges, then she must be consistent & not selective when applying & she should call for abolishing sex change maimings, which were experimented on animals.

    While I’m not an animal rights activist (though a vegetarian), I do believe in animal welfare. It’s silly to use animal behavior incl. sexual behavior as a guide to people. But the main point here is that most homosexual&lesbian groups don’t want neutrality on the discussions surrounding homosexuality & most homo groups think that sex change mutilations are OK. As noted, cure GID, don’t mutilate the patients.

  5. September 17, 2008 at 5:21 pm

    I guess I am with the gays & lesbians then. See, what they do in their own home is none of my business. It doesn’t hurt me if a gay man marries another gay man, or if they have sex every night. As to a cure… you have to believe there is something wrong with it for there to be a cure, but if someone is gay and we develop the technology to make them not gay (probably some combination of a retrovirus and brainwashing might work) and someone feels that is something they want to do… well that is their choice.

  6. 6 traversedaviestalksrubbish
    September 17, 2008 at 5:49 pm

    Traverse Davies, thanks for your thoughts. I don’t want to do an endless discussion about homosexuality as it has been talked about so many times, but here it goes again. Yes, it was removed from the APA in 1973, but the fact remains that homos&lesbians have higher copathology rates. They have higher suicide rates, Venereal Disease (VD) rates, drunkards, etc. Homosexual groups typically blame societal prejudices for the high suicide rates but Dr. Neil Whitehead has done a study which shows that even in nations such as Holland which is pro-homosexual, the suicide rates aren’t that different from that of the US. As noted, 1 can only speculate how many homoseuxals&lesbians would rather be straight but are told that going straight is not an option to be considered.

    Michael Glatze is a recovered homosexual & he used to be the editor of a gay magazine. He wrote that he changed his views of homosexuality after realizing it isn’t being neutrally discussed. He says he has been cured of it & it’s not the purpose to say that he has or hasn’t been. But what will be said is that when Michael Glatze talked about the fact that he was no longer happy being gay & wanted to be straight, he got so many hostile replies from those who didn’t respect his decision. Mainstream psychologists in the US no longer offer repair therapy to homos&lesbians who want to be straight but simply rerun what you wrote that it’s not a disease & everything else we’ve heard so many times. Could they eventually come up with a pill or surgery which can cure homosexuality? As known, science is always evolving.

    On another note, I’m not a Christian. I’m a non-religious person who sees something wrong with homosexuality & thinks GID is worse. I’m pro-choice on abortion. BTW, if it could be predicted that an unborn baby would engage in homo&lesbian sexual activities & they didn’t have the cure for it, then yes, I believe that abortion is justified, just as I believe abortion is justified if it could be predicted that a baby would have Down Syndrome. What’s noteworthy is that when I write about aborting unborn Down Syndrome babies, while controversial, it doesn’t generate the same controversy as me writing about aborting unborn homo&lesbian babies, if they can eventually predict this. Katie Couric of CBS News recently talked about aborting Down Syndrome babies, only that she used the euphemism “terminate the pregnancy” a few times before finally saying abortion. Many parents are aborting unborn babies that they learn have Down Syndrome though the % was not given. I’m sure that even more parents would abort unborn homo&lesbian babies if they can eventually predict the future sexual behaviors of an unborn baby.

  7. 7 traversedaviestalksrubbish
    September 20, 2008 at 2:31 pm

    Here’s something which further proves that what Traverse Davies wrote regarding the prostitutes on Glenn Sacks’s site is rubbish & we’ll change the roles. A policewoman arrests a bank robber & this bank robber is a man of 6 feet 4 inches tall. The policewoman is beautiful. She has the proof-$, the guns & the ski mask which prove that the man committed the bank robbery. She tells the bank robber that he is under arrest for bank robbery & that he faces many years in prison but that she may be able to help him. The bank robber asks “well how can you help me?” Policewoman tells the bank robber that if he has sex with her, then she will destroy the proof that he committed bank robbery & set him free, thus avoiding arrest for the crime that he committed.

    Now the bank robber knowing it’s his lucky day says “well let’s go ahead & do it.” Policewoman & bank robber have sex after which the policewoman destroys the bank robbery proof & sets the bank robber free. This is NOT rape. This is NOT coercion. Putting people in jail for crimes that they commit is NOT coercion. This is corruption. The policewoman should be fired for corruption & she should go to jail for it. The bank robber in addition to facing bank robbery charge, could also face charge of bribing the policewoman, however the policewoman DID NOT rape the bank robber. The bank robber was not forced to have sex with her. If anything, the bank robber wanted to have sex with the policewoman as it was a chance for him to have sex with a beautiful woman & crime did pay in his case. To say that the policewoman raped the bank robber is rubbish. Corruption NOT coercion is what was used here, as it is in the cases where a cop tells a prostitute that if she has sex with him, then he won’t arrest her for the crime that she committed. This will be rerun but arresting people & putting them in jail for crimes that they commit is NOT coercion.

  8. 8 traversedavisfartsmexicanfoodafterheeatsit
    September 22, 2008 at 3:40 pm

    Traverse Davis:

    Rape & sex abuse cases must be judged INDIVIDUALLY based on the facts of each case. Juries rule whether a sex was willful or whether it’s rape after hearing all of the facts. With consent, just as a woman or man can initially consent to have sex, change mind & revoke consent up to & incl. the sex act itself, it’s also possible for a man or woman to initially say no to sex or anything & then 1/2 a minute later voluntarily change their minds & decide that they do want to have sex. Here are 4 eg. & they are NOT rape.

    1. A woman asks a man if he wants to have sex. He answers “no, not tonight” but then 10 seconds later says “or on 2d thoughts why not”, unzips his pants & has sex with her. She didn’t threaten him nor harm him. This is not rape. The man’s subsequent words & actions are that of some1 who voluntarily changed his mind. Even if he didn’t want to have sex with her, his subsequent words & actions are of the reasonable belief that of some1 who voluntarily changed his mind & decided that he wanted to have sex.

    2. A man asks a woman if she wants to have sex. She answers “no” but then 10 seconds later says “or on 2d thoughts why not, we don’t have anything better to do tonight” after which she takes her blouse off & he has sex with her. He didn’t threaten her nor force himself in any way. This is NOT rape. Case # 2 is synonymous to case #1.

    3. A man picks up a woman . They both engage in foreplay. The woman asks the man “do you want to engage in oral sex.” He replies “no, just the missionary way.” After this she says “very well then” & they both have sex. This is NOT rape, because the man did not say no to the sex. He wanted to have straight normal sex with her, however he did not want to engage in oral sex. In many sexual encounters this happens. If a woman goes up to a man & if she asked him if he wants to engage in oral sex, many men would say “no, just the missionary way.” While many people do it, most people don’t engage in oral sex. Most men only want to engage in straight normal sex with women which is why if a woman asks a man if he wants to engage in oral sex, many will answer “no, just the missionary way.” Incidentally, oral sex has been linked to higher Venereal Disease (VD) & oral sex does raise risks of oral cancer. Most men like to put it between a woman’s legs, but they don’t want to put it in a woman’s mouth & most men don’t want to put their mouths on a woman’s genitals. This will be reduntant but most men ONLY want to put it between a woman’s legs which is why they say “no, just the missionary way.”

    4. A White man & a Chinese woman are having sex. While they’re doing it, the Chinese woman asks White man “have you ever done it with a Chinese woman before?” White man answers “no, this is my 1st time with Chinese woman.” Chinese woman then asks White man “have you ever done it with Oriental woman before?” White man answers “no, can I asks you a few ?s” Chinese woman replies “ask” & Chinese woman tells White man that she likes having sex with White men. White man asks her “have you ever done it with Japanese man?” Chinese woman answers “no, I hate Japanese people, they kill alot of Chinese during wars, I would never do it with Japanese man.” White man then asks Chinese woman “have you ever had sex with Vietnamese man?” Chinese woman replies “no & I hate Vietnamese people too”. (Vietnamese & Chinese have animosity) & any1 who knows alot about history knows that Vietnam has a long turbulent history & Ho Chi Minh during Vietnam’s War of Independence (French-Indo-China war) said that he would rather smell a few years of French shit than smell Chinese shit for the rest of time) Now the Chinese woman getting irritated by the man’s ?s asks him “can do you me a favor” White man asks “what’s that?” Chinese woman says, “please, no more talking, you’re talking about controversial topics. After this the White man says “No more comments by me then.”

    Case # 4 is NOT rape. They did NOT rape eachother. When the White man answered no, he said “no, he has never done it with a Chinese woman” & “no, he has never done it with an Oriental woman” HOWEVER, he did not tell her “no, I don’t want to do it anymore”, so consent was not revoked. The Chinese woman said “no, she wouldn’t do it with a Japanese man & that she hates Japanese people” & “no, she wouldn’t do it with a Vietnamese man & that she hates Vietnamese people” but she did NOT say “no, I don’t want to do it anymore.” There was no rape. Consent was NOT revoked in the middle of the act. Therefore, no rape.

    The above 4 eg. show that with rape & sex abuse cases, each case must be judged INDIVIDUALLY based on the facts of each case.

  9. September 22, 2008 at 5:16 pm

    Well, that is a bit of a shallow, silly example. In fact, it is less of a hypothetical and more of a script for a porno flick.
    Lets change a few variables now, see how it plays out: Instead of a six foot two stud of a bank robber, lets go with a 5’9″ guy in his late teens. Instead of bank robbery, he is a low level drug dealer, dealing exclusively in marijuana. Instead of a blond bombshell female cop, we’ll go with Roseanne Barr’s older, uglier sister (no, this person does not exist). She has bad acne scars, is about sixty pounds overweight and has a mean temper. She offers our young hero a simple choice: Sex or several years in jail. Does the appeal decrease in this scenario? See, it the guy is into the cop, then he is not being raped, he is having sex and getting all the fun of getting away with a crime in the bargain. If the choice is sex with the cop or many years behind bars and he doesn’t have any sexual desire for the cop, is disgusted by her, and does it because the consequences of not doing it are the destruction of the rest of his life it changes the equation. For the average hooker, the choice is somewhere between the two. She probably has no desire at all to sleep with the cop, but is used to sleeping with people she has no desire for.

  10. 10 traversedaviestalksrubbish
    September 24, 2008 at 5:23 pm

    Traverse Davis, your point is taken, but no, I don’t believe that the 5 foot 9 drug seller got raped by the ugly policewoman who is Roseanne Barr’s older sister. Yes, she must be fired sent to jail for the the crimes of corruption & obstructing justice. You said that she has a mean temper which may change the situation if she pointed a gun @ him or did anything which could be reasonably believed to be a threat of harm, then you would have a rape case.

    In the case of the cops & the women prostitutes, if the cops have arrested them for the crime of prostitution & say “you’re under arrest, but I may be able to help you get out this arrest.” Woman arrested for prostitution asks “well how can you help me?” Cop says “if you want me to destroy the proof & get you out of the mess you’re in, you can have sex with me & I’ll destroy the proof.” The arrested woman says “well what are you waiting for, let’s do it.” After having sex, the cop destroys the proof & she is out of trouble. OK, like the cop like the 2 others incl. Roseanne Barr’s older fatter & uglier sister should be fired & convicted of the crimes of corruption & obstructing justice. The situation could be different if they told the arrestees that they’ll be charged with crimes that they didn’t commit & the arresting officer knew or reasonably should know the arrestee did not do. The man who is a drug seller would’ve been raped by Roseanne Barr’s older, fatter & uglier sister if she told him that he’ll be arrested for murder (a crime that he didn’t commit), if he doesn’t have sex with her. But if it’s simply an offer to get out of an arrest for a crime that some1 committed, it’s corruption & obstructing justice. Each case must be judged individually. If such cases are brought to trial, then juries should decide whether the cops should be convicted of the serious charges of rape & kidnapping (false/illegal imprisonment is kidnapping) or the less serious charges of corruption & obstructing justice.

  11. September 24, 2008 at 6:19 pm

    I guess we will just have to disagree. I think in this case it is a pretty mild disagreement, as we both believe the cop needs to be fired and charged with something. Our disagreement is more a matter of degree than of kind…

  12. 12 megynkellyfartsaftersheeatsmexicanfood
    October 8, 2008 at 4:47 pm

    Hello Traverse:

    I hope all is well. Let me say that with violence in general, other than size differences, I don’t think men hitting women is different from men hitting men, women hitting men or women hitting women. The punishment for assault&battery as well as murder, must be based on the facts & circumstances of each case. For eg., if a woman goes up to a man & tells him his mom is a trashy slut & the man slaps her in the face, I don’t see it as any different as if a man hits another man for the same reason. Of course, he must be arrested for assault&battery, but the punishment must be less than if he hit w/o provocation. Lawyer Gloria Allred who is a menopausal crone who does smelly farts & turds is a woman who I wouldn’t feel sorry for if she got hit in the face.

    What has tuned me out about the crimes of domestic violence & rape is the ideology that sometimes dominate it. For eg., the Duke Lacrosse case where it was proven that the woman lied, Canadian columnist Rachel Marsden or Rachel Fartsden (as I call her) continued to downplay the gravity of what Crystal Gayle Mangum (the accuser) did. Rachel Marsden (Fartsden) does smelly farts & turds. What’s sad is how the media actually gave seriousness to her opinion. Lawyer Wendy Murphy is an evil crone & I don’t watch much TV anymore, because Wendy Murphy talks rubbish about rape, domestic violence, etc. esp. the rubbish she said about the Duke Lacrosse case. I won’t feel sorry for Wendy Murphy is some1 hits her in the face. Of course, hitting or worse killing some1 is bad & you must go to prison for it. There’s no excuse to hit or kill any1 other than self-defense. But if some1 is consistently being provoked & the provoked person hits or kills the other, then while it doesn’t excuse it, it definitely puts comprehension into it. Also, I once worked for a defense lawyer who defended people accused of crimes as serious as murder. Any1 can commit murder if given the circumstances.

    On a final note regarding what you said about alcohol, drugs & rape. It’s rape if the woman or man is so impaired that they can’t comprehend what they’re doing. Obviously if you’re sleeping, you can’t understand what you’re doing. If you’ve drunk alcohol & then have sex, the issue becomes did the alcohol impair you to the point that you couldn’t comprehend what you were doing & did the other know or reasonably should know that you’re so impaired that you can’t comprehend what you’re doing? A prosecutor will argue that the woman was so impaired that she didn’t understand what she was doing & this was reasonably known to the suspect, while a defense lawyer will say that the woman was sober enough to understand what sex is. A jury after hearing the arguments will then determine how sober or how impaired she was & if so, was this reasonably known to him?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: