• 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]

NoC_T said:
When you creatively manipulate the acknowledged definitions this way, we're left with any number of possibilities that all undermine the already notoriously difficult process of proving rape in the first place. Taking your view, we could argue that a guy who threatens to dump his girlfriend has raped her, if she gives it up to prevent him from doing so. Or that guilt could be considered as 'psychological torture'. You're really grasping at straws here.
Click to expand...

Is it just me or is it more then a little disturbing that we trust peoples judgment enough when they are empowered to determine that a threat is "real" enough to shoot someone but we won't trust a woman's judgment enough to decide for herself when she has been forced to have sex against her will. Hmmm
 
opendebate said:
Is it just me or is it more then a little disturbing that we trust peoples judgment enough when they are empowered to determine that a threat is "real" enough to shoot someone but we won't trust a woman's judgment enough to decide for herself when she has been forced to have sex against her will. Hmmm
Click to expand...
In both cases, a grand jury will normally make the call

the factual scenario involving the woman in the OP is one that strongly suggests no rape
 
opendebate said:
This is the definition of rape per the US Justice Department:
“The 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.”
USDOJ: Attorney General Eric Holder Announces Revisions to the Uniform Crime Report’s Definition of Rape

She claims:
Espinosa insists that he coerced her, psychologically and physically, into having sex against her will

So her claims fit the definition.

The question is, how do you prove such a thing? Is it even possible without a confession from the accused?

We may never know if what transpired between the two of them was consensual or if she was or was coerced. The problem here, in this thread, is the willingness of so many to not only immediately dismiss her claims but go on to accuse her of being a pissed off bitch and a whore. Based on what!? You are in effect doing to her exactly what you are screaming is the injustice being done to him. Why does he have such instant credibility and why does she have so little?
Click to expand...

Rape victims don't act the way she acts. That's why she has zero credibility.
 
opendebate said:
No, I'm saying that at this point we don't know the details of her claim that she was physically and psychologically coerced either because she is unwilling to share them or they have not come out yet. That does not mean that they don't exist.

You're behavior is a little over the top given what we know for sure. A whore...really? A pissed off bitch....really? You are discrediting yourself.
Click to expand...
Whereas you're casually discrediting the authenticity of every woman who ever demonstrably suffered such an ordeal.

Aren't they your 'sisters' too?
 
opendebate said:
Is it just me or is it more then a little disturbing that we trust peoples judgment enough when they are empowered to determine that a threat is "real" enough to shoot someone but we won't trust a woman's judgment enough to decide for herself when she has been forced to have sex against her will. Hmmm
Click to expand...



We do neither and the two do not compare.


One is an affirmative defense against murder, and typically requires that available evidence meet specific legal standards of self-defense.

The other is an accusation levied against someone who is presumed innocent... and our standard is always that evidence must conclude guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, we don't incarcerate simply on someone's say-so.
 
opendebate said:
Is it just me or is it more then a little disturbing that we trust peoples judgment enough when they are empowered to determine that a threat is "real" enough to shoot someone but we won't trust a woman's judgment enough to decide for herself when she has been forced to have sex against her will. Hmmm
Click to expand...

But the thing is, according to the article, she claims she was NOT forced. She says that no force or threats of violence were used, so I am still trying to figure this out.
 
ChrisL said:
Since there were no threats, violence or force used, maybe he hypnotized her to stay with him for 3 years and have sex with him against her will. The guy was like Svengali, and she had no control over her own body.
Click to expand...
In addition to implanting subliminal hypnotic suggestions, to the effect that she refuse to divulge the particulars, while dragging him over the coals publicly.

BS thread is BS.
 
ChrisL said:
But the thing is, according to the article, she claims she was NOT forced. She says that no force or threats of violence were used, so I am still trying to figure this out.
Click to expand...




Ditto.
 
TurtleDude said:
blacks engage in racism far more than women engage in rape though
Click to expand...
There's the whole 'can black people be racist?' debate. I say no, but that's for another thread. I can't speak to the US judiciary, but here, a woman can't directly commit rape. She can be charged as an accomplice, but she can't perpetrate the act itself.
 
Because her definition of "coercion" is akin to a guy nudging her shoulder and saying "c'moooooon" or "you'd do it if you loved me". My God, the monster.
 
opendebate said:
How is she acting?
Click to expand...

Sketchy, unreliable, and with an obvious axe to grind. This is why she waited a month - all potential evidence of her lying goes bye-bye. Now she can sling accusations from a safe distance.
 
ChrisL said:
But the thing is, according to the article, she claims she was NOT forced. She says that no force or threats of violence were used, so I am still trying to figure this out.
Click to expand...

from the article:

Espinosa insists that he coerced her, psychologically and physically, into having sex against her will for most of their three-year relationship. She resisted, told him no, pushed him away.

reference the DOJ definition of rape from my earlier post.

People are turning this into a battle between him and her. I haven't taken a side. I am defending her right to speak up and heard and not immediately dismissed. I find the ease and the immediacy with which she was dismissed here disturbing
 
opendebate said:
Is it just me or is it more then a little disturbing that we trust peoples judgment enough when they are empowered to determine that a threat is "real" enough to shoot someone but we won't trust a woman's judgment enough to decide for herself when she has been forced to have sex against her will. Hmmm
Click to expand...
How do you draw any parallels there, beyond a nebulous description of 'judgement' with no recourse to context?

We have no evidence to suggest she had sex against her will, other than her (extremely belated) claim of such.
 
NoC_T said:
No arguing with logic like that.

Cheers, Jack. :peace
Click to expand...

Greetings. As you rightly noted, it's not the thread for a racism discussion, but I doubt a country with an African American POTUS presents entrenched racism at every level of society.:peace
 
Gipper said:
Sketchy, unreliable, and with an obvious axe to grind. This is why she waited a month - all potential evidence of her lying goes bye-bye. Now she can sling accusations from a safe distance.
Click to expand...

The article does not show her as sketchy or unreliable. Those are your deeply bias and profoundly uninformed opinions of behavior that is pretty consistent with women who have been raped.

I'm gonna go read now. sweet dreams
 
opendebate said:
The article does not show her as sketchy or unreliable. Those are your deeply bias and profoundly uninformed opinions of behavior that is pretty consistent with women who have been raped.

I'm gonna go read now. sweet dreams
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. It is her contradicting herself. How could there be no force and no threats or violence, yet she was physically coerced? Since you are defending this obvious contradiction, please explain how that is possible.
 
Jack Hays said:
Greetings. As you rightly noted, it's not the thread for a racism discussion, but I doubt a country with an African American POTUS presents entrenched racism at every level of society.:peace
Click to expand...
Entrenched. Not omnipresent. Sun shines on a dog's ass some days. :peace
 
opendebate said:
The article does not show her as sketchy or unreliable. Those are your deeply bias and profoundly uninformed opinions of behavior that is pretty consistent with women who have been raped.

I'm gonna go read now. sweet dreams
Click to expand...
lulz

Yeah. An unfounded, vague and questionable accusation ought to become the standardised basis of legality.
 
NoC_T said:
Entrenched. Not omnipresent. Sun shines on a dog's ass some days. :peace
Click to expand...

Best metaphor I've come across is smoking. Once nearly universal in all settings and among all classes, it's gone from impolite to unacceptable to banned, and banished to dark corners and the margins of society.:peace
 
opendebate said:
from the article:

Espinosa insists that he coerced her, psychologically and physically, into having sex against her will for most of their three-year relationship. She resisted, told him no, pushed him away.

reference the DOJ definition of rape from my earlier post.

People are turning this into a battle between him and her. I haven't taken a side. I am defending her right to speak up and heard and not immediately dismissed. I find the ease and the immediacy with which she was dismissed here disturbing
Click to expand...

I see where you left off the part that says he persisted and SHE GAVE IN. That is consent sister.
 
opendebate said:
The article does not show her as sketchy or unreliable. Those are your deeply bias and profoundly uninformed opinions of behavior that is pretty consistent with women who have been raped.

I'm gonna go read now. sweet dreams
Click to expand...

Hope to discuss this with you tomorrow. Maybe after a month of silence about the "attack", she'll have a cathartic moment we can discuss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom