• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ending Rape On Campus[W 228]

Yes, he was her boyfriend. No, he hadn't pinned her down, or threatened violence. But Espinosa insists that he coerced her, psychologically and physically, into having sex against her will for most of their three-year relationship.


That just sounds contradictory, and calls the definition of physical coercion into question.

The university investigated and found...

It took five months for school administrators to reach the conclusion that Espinosa's complaint was "unsubstantiated."


Anyone can make an accusation, that doesn't make it real... you have to substantiate it. Apparently the U did not find it so. :shrug:


This is why I'm questioning HER individual case... **** doesn't add up quite right.
 
Again, the woman said there was no force or even THREATS of violence. Since you are so gung-ho to call this rape, please give us some examples of physical coercion that are used on an adult woman for sex that are not related to the use of force or threats.

If I have to explain to a woman about rape, that would be like a white man having to explain to a black man about racism. But given your profound ignorance and denial on this topic, I may wind up having to.
 
That just sounds contradictory, and calls the definition of physical coercion into question.

The university investigated and found...




Anyone can make an accusation, that doesn't make it real... you have to substantiate it. Apparently the U did not find it so. :shrug:


This is why I'm questioning HER individual case... **** doesn't add up quite right.

Please provide for us a definition of "informed consent."
 
So, no, you didn't read the article. Because you would have found the answer in the first three paragraphs.

DERP. Of course I read the article. HERE are the first four paragraphs, and she gives NO explanation as to what she means by "physical coercion." Interesting, how a month AFTER the relationship ended is when she decided to make rape allegations too. She sounds nuttier than squirrel poop IMO.

Yes, he was her boyfriend. No, he hadn't pinned her down, or threatened violence. But Espinosa insists that he coerced her, psychologically and physically, into having sex against her will for most of their three-year relationship.

"I knew that it was sexual assault, but at the time, I felt extreme shame and was not ready nor willing to fully accept what was happening," said Espinosa, 24. "Like most unpleasant truths, I buried it until the end of my relationship, when I realized I was holding onto a relationship with a man who was abusive."

The relationship came to an end in February 2013. The next month, Espinosa filed a sexual harassment claim against her former boyfriend with her school, the University of Texas-Pan American, where some of the incidents occurred.

She says she went to the school first because she thought that without concrete evidence law enforcement would not take her seriously -- a common experience among people who report rape to law enforcement, experts say. Besides, she knew that colleges and universities are federally mandated to investigate sexual violence under Title IX, a federal civil rights law that guarantees students the right to an education free of sexual violence, which is considered a form of discrimination.
 
Interesting, how a month AFTER the relationship ended is when she decided to make rape allegations too. She sounds nuttier than squirrel poop IMO.

Kind of like the average domestic violence victim who is beaten 35 times before they call the cops for the first time.
 
If I have to explain to a woman about rape, that would be like a white man having to explain to a black man about racism. But given your profound ignorance and denial on this topic, I may wind up having to.

"Coercion" is not a valid excuse for an adult. That is only valid in cases that involve children and statutory rape. You really should educate yourself. A "bad relationship" or even an "abusive relationship" does not equal rape. Sorry, but it doesn't.
 
Possible trigger warning (hell, this whole damn thread needs a trigger warning):

That's hysterical (or it would be if wasn't so close to reality)
 
Kind of like the average domestic violence victim who is beaten 35 times before they call the cops for the first time.

She said there was no violence and no force. For God's sake, she says that he didn't even threaten her!

Obviously she is bitter about a bad relationship, and because she regrets her decision to stay in this bad relationship, she wants to call it "rape" now. That is just nuts.
 
Please provide for us a definition of "informed consent."




When you provide me one of "physical coercion" that apparently excludes holding, violence or threats.
 
I hate to resort to this but....

RAPE:
1-the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
2-any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.

Are we actually having the "No really means no" conversation again.

I don't think anyone disagree's with this definition.

The problem lies in many people who wish to expand the definition. For example no reasonable person would object to a charge of rape if someone were to take advantage of a person who is unconscious. Others however would call it rape if a person is conscious but drunk. If two people are drinking and they have sex which one is the rapist?

Or in the example being discussed here in this thread. A person alleges to have been the victim of rape but will only allude to some vague claim of coercion. Possibly true? Yes! Possibly a lie? Yes !
 
No PHYSICAL force. But perhaps DURESS (the use of force, false imprisonment or threats (and possibly psychological torture or "brainwashing") to compel someone to act contrary to his/her wishes or interests).

I am merely trying to make the point that it can be considered rape without the use of physical force. Psychological torture or coercion can also make it rape. As for this case I don't know enough of the specifics about what this woman experienced to claim that rape did occur but neither do I know enough right now to just dismiss her claims.

Good Lord, I swear some people are just dense. SHE said there was NO FORCE and NO THREATS.
 
She said there was no violence and no force.

The point is that if the average domestic abuse victim is beaten that many times before they first seek help, it doesn't surprise me in the least that anybody else being abused in a relationship -- even if they aren't being beaten -- would wait to seek help.
 
Please provide for us a definition of "informed consent."

How would it undermine his argument, which was based on the contradictory nature of her claim about "physical coercion"?
 
DERP. Of course I read the article. HERE are the first four paragraphs, and she gives NO explanation as to what she means by "physical coercion." Interesting, how a month AFTER the relationship ended is when she decided to make rape allegations too. She sounds nuttier than squirrel poop IMO.

If you can honestly read that and conclude that she is not alleging sexual assault, then you have just proven your unquestionable ignorance of this subject. It's because of people like you who trivialize her case that she has the right not to reveal the details. Do you have any idea about the suicide rates of rape survivors? Geez, your comments remind me of people who feel they have the right to know what is going on in everyone's bedroom. Why are you so interested, in the details, Chris? What pleasure are you missing out on by not knowing what happened? Do you have some kind of fetish that you feel needs satisfying? I'm serious about this. I feel like I'm having a debate with someone who can't understand why murdering someone is a bad thing.
 
The point is that if the average domestic abuse victim is beaten that many times before they first seek help, it doesn't surprise me in the least that anybody else being abused in a relationship -- even if they aren't being beaten -- would wait to seek help.

That still does not equate to rape.
 
When you provide me one of "physical coercion" that apparently excludes holding, violence or threats.

The definition of rape depends on the presence of consent. This entire debate comes down to consent. You need to know what consent is before you can proceed.
 
I don't think anyone disagree's with this definition.

The problem lies in many people who wish to expand the definition. For example no reasonable person would object to a charge of rape if someone were to take advantage of a person who is unconscious. Others however would call it rape if a person is conscious but drunk. If two people are drinking and they have sex which one is the rapist?

Or in the example being discussed here in this thread. A person alleges to have been the victim of rape but will only allude to some vague claim of coercion. Possibly true? Yes! Possibly a lie? Yes !

I think if a woman says no it means no, period. The question is, did she say no. I have no idea. Which, I think, is basically your point. There is a problem from my perspective when someone is so ready to dismiss her without knowing what the coercion involved. This implies that only physical force equals rape. Which is inaccurate.
 
If you can honestly read that and conclude that she is not alleging sexual assault, then you have just proven your unquestionable ignorance of this subject. It's because of people like you who trivialize her case that she has the right not to reveal the details. Do you have any idea about the suicide rates of rape survivors? Geez, your comments remind me of people who feel they have the right to know what is going on in everyone's bedroom. Why are you so interested, in the details, Chris? What pleasure are you missing out on by not knowing what happened? Do you have some kind of fetish that you feel needs satisfying? I'm serious about this. I feel like I'm having a debate with someone who can't understand why murdering someone is a bad thing.

You are just wrong. She herself says she was not forced nor threatened, nor was she drugged (that would be an easy conviction). Therefore, she had consensual sex and is bitter and probably a little loopy to begin with.
 
The point is that if the average domestic abuse victim is beaten that many times before they first seek help, it doesn't surprise me in the least that anybody else being abused in a relationship -- even if they aren't being beaten -- would wait to seek help.

That happens all the time. Survivors of domestic violence, whether sexual assault is involved or not, often feel trapped and helpless. And police typically give them markedly less attention than they deserve.
 
It's odd...


Most of the time, if someone levies an accusation of a serious crime against another person, then makes contradictory statements about how it happened, MOST people would question whether that person's accusations were legitimate on that basis (ie that they could not seem to explain their **** straight). It would be a red flag to almost everyone.


Unless it is an accusation of rape, apparently...
 
I think if a woman says no it means no, period. The question is, did she say no. I have no idea. Which, I think, is basically your point. There is a problem from my perspective when someone is so ready to dismiss her without knowing what the coercion involved. This implies that only physical force equals rape. Which is inaccurate.

Oh so if you say "no" but lie there spread eagle naked on the bed in front of your boyfriend, and he starts touching you and trying to get you in the mood, is that rape in your opinion?
 
If you can honestly read that and conclude that she is not alleging sexual assault, then you have just proven your unquestionable ignorance of this subject. It's because of people like you who trivialize her case that she has the right not to reveal the details. Do you have any idea about the suicide rates of rape survivors? Geez, your comments remind me of people who feel they have the right to know what is going on in everyone's bedroom. Why are you so interested, in the details, Chris? What pleasure are you missing out on by not knowing what happened? Do you have some kind of fetish that you feel needs satisfying? I'm serious about this. I feel like I'm having a debate with someone who can't understand why murdering someone is a bad thing.

She has no case to be trivialized that is the point.

Your stance that every or even most allegations are true is the real proof of ignorance.

Rape is a heinous, repugnant and serious crime and the vast majority of people agree with that. The people convicted and proven to be guilty of such a crime deserve severe punishment. But as it is common also for women to make false accusations we must always be careful to withhold judgement untoil all the facts are in and until the allegation is proven.

The conversation is more like you being akin to someone who claims murder does not even require a dead person to prove.
 
The definition of rape depends on the presence of consent. This entire debate comes down to consent. You need to know what consent is before you can proceed.

His argument was about the contradictory nature of her accusation, which has nothing to do with the definition of consent.

Your above post is a Non sequitur
 
Good Lord, I swear some people are just dense. SHE said there was NO FORCE and NO THREATS.

You always seem to resort to name calling when people don't see things your way ChrisL. It's really not necessary and kind of puts the brakes on the conversation. So please stop. I hear you and understand perfectly. SHE however feels there are grounds to claim she was raped and until I hear more details about what she thinks constitutes that accusation I won't dismiss her claim any more than I will assume she is full of ****. When someone jumps immediately to discredit her based on a very limited definition of what makes rape rape I think they are pandering.
 
It's odd...


Most of the time, if someone levies an accusation of a serious crime against another person, then makes contradictory statements about how it happened, MOST people would question whether that person's accusations were legitimate on that basis (ie that they could not seem to explain their **** straight). It would be a red flag to almost everyone.


Unless it is an accusation of rape, apparently...


It's hard to get your **** straight when you've been sufficiently traumatized. Depending on the severity of your experience and where you are in the recovery process, sometimes you don't even know where you are or who you're talking to.

I'm not saying I automatically believe her because she said it, I'm just not automatically disregarding her for the same reason the university didn't automatically punish the man she accused.
 
Back
Top Bottom