Outrage over "Don't be that girl" Posters in Edmonton.

[josykay]

I am unable to post links right now, but there IS a poste about a male victim.

But i am pretty shure, the picture is discriminating as well because the rapist is male?

Edit:
Damn, to slow...

[starlord]

In December 2011, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III, approved revisions to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program’s 80-year-old definition of rape.
previously it read;“the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will”
you stats came from a source citing FBI in 2006
and you are surprised the stats are skewed?, oh wait you are not because you still think they are valid "i guess if that was the case, but its not. as you know."
they changed it in 2011 to; “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”
just so we are both arguing the same thing, 2006 is before 2011.

and if we include all other sexual crimes the difference is quite neglible. so it pretty much makes no difference to my point.

oh and Please define; being in a mentally impaired state means a person cannot legally consent to sex.
also if i have sex with a girl and i´m just as drunk as her (thus qualifying for the special protection you have previously asserted) i cant consent to have sex with her either, I.E i may be raping here but since im drunk i cant actually consent to sex, which makes the argument not about consent but who was the more active participant or?

that depends on your state, you should probably look it up to avoid any trouble.
however, in the example being used here its pretty clear that someone whos unconscious cant consent.

[Lolretadin]

because men do 97% of them. thus, the most common scenario...

Yeah, but the average male rapist has an average of 7 victims each... so even though your statistic - which is about 7% off - is pretty damn high, you would be surprised how it changes when you count that, the amount of false accusations, and the like. Even then, less than 1/50 rapes actually lead to convictions. I wonder why that is? Shitty courts? Or maybe women lying about things that didn't happen?

[Deleted]

Yeah, but the average male rapist has an average of 7 victims each... so even though your statistic - which is about 7% off - is pretty damn high, you would be surprised how it changes when you count that, the amount of false accusations, and the like. Even then, less than 1/50 rapes actually lead to convictions. I wonder why that is? Shitty courts? Or maybe women lying about things that didn't happen?

Most are dropped due to lack of evidence. That doesn't mean it didn't happen though, it just means they can't prove it happened, in court.

[starlord]

Yeah, but the average male rapist has an average of 7 victims each... so even though your statistic - which is about 7% off - is pretty damn high, you would be surprised how it changes when you count that, the amount of false accusations, and the like. Even then, less than 1/50 rapes actually lead to convictions. I wonder why that is? Shitty courts? Or maybe women lying about things that didn't happen?

rapes are known to be quite underreported exactly because of this kind of attitude.

and they are much more difficult to prove than stories about "my friends brothers cousins roomate" would have you believe.

[Pebble]

rapes are known to be quite underreported exactly because of this kind of attitude

I am in no way trying to diminish the difficulty in coming forward as a rape victim, but consider this... As hard as it is for women to come forth, it's much harder for men.

We don't get the luxury of being considered liars, we just get laughed at.

The fact that many women don't report it is basically irrelevant, men don't either (and arguably many more men).

[Deleted]

and if we include all other sexual crimes the difference is quite neglible. so it pretty much makes no difference to my point.

that depends on your state, you should probably look it up to avoid any trouble.
however, in the example being used here its pretty clear that someone whos unconscious cant consent.

i wasn't making a legal argument, because, legally there exists no special protection for being drunk as long as you are conscious, at least where i live, but rather i was making an argument of how insane and illogical yours was, and no, "being in a mentally impaired state means a person cannot legally consent to sex" =/= is not the same as unconscious, because mentally impaired means having bad mental functions, not non existant ones.

and non sequentially, you would like to say that this a discussion about rape, where you have said that "you clearly didnt look at my link. and we were discussing rape, which is a very specific crime. sexual abuse covers a whole spectrum of crimes. "
i think that if the definition of rape is "the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will" that the stats will be immeasurably skewered towards one side, and then when confronted with that fact you say:"and if we include all other sexual crimes the difference is quite neglible. so it pretty much makes no difference to my point." thereby completely ignoring yourself, just a few posts ago.

pick your topic, cant have both this is either a discussion about rape in which case your point and stats are ludicrous or its about abuse and then the 1/9 number seems quite plausible to me.

[starlord]

i wasn't making a legal argument, because, legally there exists no special protection for being drunk as long as you are conscious, at least where i live, but rather i was making an argument of how insane and illogical yours was, and no, "being in a mentally impaired state means a person cannot legally consent to sex" =/= is not the same as unconscious, because mentally impaired means having bad mental functions, not non existant ones.

it means your mental functions are impaired by biology or drugs or anything. its the same reason children and people found to be seriously mentally ill cant consent. alcohol is no different than roofies.

and non sequentially, you would like to say that this a discussion about rape, where you have said that "you clearly didnt look at my link. and we were discussing rape, which is a very specific crime. sexual abuse covers a whole spectrum of crimes. "
i think that if the definition of rape is "the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will" that the stats will be immeasurably skewered towards one side, and then when confronted with that fact you say:"and if we include all other sexual crimes the difference is quite neglible. so it pretty much makes no difference to my point." thereby completely ignoring yourself, just a few posts ago.

pick your topic, cant have both this is either a discussion about rape in which case your point and stats are ludicrous or its about abuse and then the 1/9 number seems quite plausible to me.

you guys are the ones trying to shift topics because you dont like the numbers or definitions. and including all sexual offenses (even nonviolent) still puts women in the single digits. so it makes sense that a simple poster about rape would be about a male raping a female.

[Deleted]

and non sequentially, you would like to say that this a discussion about rape, where you have said that "you clearly didnt look at my link. and we were discussing rape, which is a very specific crime. sexual abuse covers a whole spectrum of crimes. "
i think that if the definition of rape is "the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will" that the stats will be immeasurably skewered towards one side, and then when confronted with that fact you say:"and if we include all other sexual crimes the difference is quite neglible. so it pretty much makes no difference to my point." thereby completely ignoring yourself, just a few posts ago.

pick your topic, cant have both this is either a discussion about rape in which case your point and stats are ludicrous or its about abuse and then the 1/9 number seems quite plausible to me.

Let's take it from Sweden then.

Might be not properly translated, I don't really know how to translate it thoroughly but it should atleast get the point across.

The One who through violence or through threat of criminal action forces a person to intercourse or to take part in or be subjected to a sexual act that can in regard to the violations gravity be comparable to intercourse, will be sentenced to prison for atleast 2 years and 6 years maximum for rape.

The same applies if a person performs intercourse or an otherwise sexual act that is according to the first paragraph comparable to intercourse by abusing that the person because of unconsciousness, sleep, serious fear, intoxication or other drug influence, illness, bodily injuries or mental illness or otherwise with regard to the circumstances, are in a vulnerable state.

This is pretty much the definition of it in Sweden. Statistically known, 98% men who rape and 2% women with these definitions.

[Deleted]

This pretty much the definition of it in Sweden. Statistically known, 98% men who rape and 2% women with these definitions.

and where is that statistic from?
the Holy Grail of feminists seems to be the CDC study shoving 1/4 females being raped, and not getting into the completely retarded methodology and definition of rape,
"For male victims, the sex of the perpetrator varied by the type of sexual violence experienced. The majority of male rape victims (93.3%) reported only male perpetrators. For three of the other forms of sexual violence, a majority of male victims reported only female perpetrators: being made to penetrate (79.2%), sexual coercion (83.6%), and unwanted sexual contact (53.1%). For non-contact unwanted sexual experiences, approximately half of male victims (49.0%) reported only male perpetrators and more than one-third (37.7%) reported only female perpetrators "

now keep in mind that their definition strictly limits rape to penetration, a definition no one else shares: The researchers freely admit that they are not using the FBI or any state’s definition of rape.

but looking at those stats the number of males raped jumps to 1/16 - a Far cry from the reports 1/71 and the clear majority of offenders are FEMALE, so either the Swedish girls are either so attractive no one ever says no or moraly superior to American women or more likely you just don't have any real stats.

[Deleted]

and where is that statistic from?

The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention.
http://bra.se/bra/bra-in-english/home.html

[Blur4stuff]

a majority of rapists may be male, but a majority of males aren't rapists. these types of campaigns are a waste of resources. nearly every male that sees them has never raped and would never rape. for the males who rape, a poster isn't going to stop them. the reason they rape isn't because no one ever told them it was wrong.

[ciggy]

It's fairly obvious that the latter posters are attempting to discredit legitimate rape accusations because of the victim's intoxication; perhaps implying that they *seemed* to consent, as if that were valid.

fairly obvious, my aching ass. It's a damn shame when drunken consent turns into sober non consent. I have been drunk and let my standards slip a few times, and wished I hadn't slept with the girl i ended up sleeping with. Drunken me has very low standards. That doesn't mean I was raped, it just means drunken me has low standards. I fucking loathe women that scream rape over that. It discredits legitimate rape, and makes the accusations of women that were raped be drawn into question.
My heart goes out to anyone that has been raped, the false rape claims are an affront to everyone and the women that make them should be drawn and quartered. Sickening pieces of shit. I have so much scorn for them. My first wife claimed rape after a night of indiscretion, it ruined our marriage and has made me mistrust women every since. I could have handled being told the truth, but the cheating plus the lying just doomed us. I never trusted another word that came out of her lying mouth.

[Wells]

fairly obvious, my aching ass. It's a damn shame when drunken consent turns into sober non consent. I have been drunk and let my standards slip a few times, and wished I hadn't slept with the girl i ended up sleeping with. Drunken me has very low standards. That doesn't mean I was raped, it just means drunken me has low standards. I fucking loathe women that scream rape over that. It discredits legitimate rape, and makes the accusations of women that were raped be drawn into question.
My heart goes out to anyone that has been raped, the false rape claims are an affront to everyone and the women that make them should be drawn and quartered. Sickening pieces of shit. I have so much scorn for them. My first wife claimed rape after a night of indiscretion, it ruined our marriage and has made me mistrust women every since. I could have handled being told the truth, but the cheating plus the lying just doomed us. I never trusted another word that came out of her lying mouth.

Do you think perhaps your personal history is coloring your perception here?

[Omgarsh]

Maybe the thread has taken a different turn, because I'm only on page 2. But I don't really like either position. A "Men's Rights" group is a stupid thing to talk about because we already have virtually all the rights in the world (especially white men). But the "Don't be that guy" poster is horrible. It makes it sound like all guys just see a drunk girl and start humping.

[Deleted]

it means your mental functions are impaired by biology or drugs or anything. its the same reason children and people found to be seriously mentally ill cant consent. alcohol is no different than roofies.

you guys are the ones trying to shift topics because you dont like the numbers or definitions. and including all sexual offenses (even nonviolent) still puts women in the single digits. so it makes sense that a simple poster about rape would be about a male raping a female.

mentally impaired =/= unconscious was my point.
well if i imbibe the alcohol myself im not entitled to those special protections, because i VOLUNTARILY drank, whereas roofies, unless you actualy take them for your sleeping issues, is something Done to you, see the difference?
"Hence, the potential defense would be denied defendants who had voluntarily disabled themselves by knowingly consuming the relevant liquids or substances, while allowing a defense to those who had unknowingly consumed them"

[Deleted]

the reason they rape isn't because no one ever told them it was wrong.

In case of drunk girl saying no, drunk guy wanting sex - yes, it can be. If it wasn't common, why would they make this?

[pickley]

Its crazy that this is even an issue.

Women lie about rape, some people are sick in the head. The poster is simply saying "Dont do it"

Men, dont rape.
Women, dont pretend to be raped.

Both people pissed out of their heads, unable to really think. If they have sex, consensual while drunk. Its not rape, its sex. If you wake up in the morning, realise you shouldnt have had sex with the guy, dont claim rape...You are as equally responsible.

[ciggy]

Do you think perhaps your personal history is coloring your perception here?

Who's perception isn't colored by personal history? Yes, I know it is.


Tell me one person that doesn't get upset when someone that has made a rape accusation later changes the story.

[Wells]

Who's perception isn't colored by personal history? Yes, I know it is.


Tell me one person that doesn't get upset when someone that has made a rape accusation later changes the story.

Maybe you should try to divorce your personal history from your views regarding women and rape