So if it was rape why is he in jail for only raping one woman and not both, or conversely why isnt the second woman in jail for assisting, or even initiating this rape?

Turns out it was another guy, who was never charged even though he also admitted to having sex with her.

She claimed she was too drunk to consent and must have been drugged. No evidence to that effect was ever presented.

His conviction was overturned and at retrial at least two men claimed she while drunk initiated sexual encounters with them, both before and after this incident.

He was found not guilty and already signed to a team

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/14/footballer-ched-evans-cleared-of-in-retrial

It's hard to digest that rape is common because it is a crime between people who are close. If someone is going to rape you it will most likely be a family member, a close friend, a spouse or a person of significant standing within your community. People like to believe it is a crime between strangers.

Take R.Kelly. Is he a rapist? Yes, the evidence is pretty clear. Now prove it in court. You can't. Now sway public opinion against him. You can't because he targets girls nobody cares about and whose parents are money hungry.

But you will be able to do both those things without evidence if it a economically poor man who is accused of raping a stranger.

I never understood why women didnt tell feminists to fuck off when feminists started recommending rape victims not go to the police right away or fight back against their rapists

It should also be noted that the young woman in this case never accused anyone of rape. The rape charges were formulated by the police and the Crown Prosecution Service - she was merely a witness.

See this sober article in the London 'Daily Telegraph' for more details:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/the-filter/why-the-fallout-from-the-ched-evans-verdict-puts-all-of-our-sons/

The UK police and CPS are starting to develop a reputation for zealously pursuing celebrities for supposed sex crimes even when there is little or no evidence that a crime has even occurred, and sometimes merely on allegations of crimes which supposedly occurred 20, 30, even 40 years ago. Following the case of Jimmy Savile, a DJ and entertainer with powerful friends who was found (after his death) to have been abusing children and the disabled for more than 40 years, the police now seem to take the default position that any celebrity or other public figure is de-facto a rapist until proven otherwise.

Meanwhile, gangs of Islamic thugs who abused and trafficked thousands of children in the UK went uninvestigated and unpunished for decades because the police and social services were afraid of being accused of being 'racist' or 'culturally insensitive'. You figure it out.

llater,

llamas

The Duke 88 have never apologized.

The Duke 88 have never apologized.

MarkD is right, and it's clear that feminists and white-knight types want to shift the burden of proof for rape cases onto the defendant. Through a fortuitous set of circumstances, the accused Duke lacrosse players were actually able to prove their innocence. Most of the time, that will be very difficult to do. It's why Dr. T advises men who are trying to separate from or divorce personality-disordered women to Always Be Recording.

There's been a bunch of high-profile false accusation cases in the UK recently, and the Met has a bunch of egg on its face. Leon Brittan, a Tory MP, was falsely accused of rape by a Labor activist and forced to resign from office. He went to his grave with people touting him as a rapist. Five months after he died, Scotland Yard finally admitted they had no evidence whatsoever other than the accusation of the alleged victim (who claimed that it happened in 1967), and that the accuser had a long history of fabulism regarding sex crimes. She was subject to no punishment, and her identity is still being protected by Scotland Yard and the media.

There's also the case of Lord Bramall, a D-Day hero who was hit with fantastic allegations of being involved in a child sex ring. The accuser also named former Prime Minister Edward Heath and the head (can't recall the name) of MI6. The accusations were completely anonymous, coming from someone who identified himself as "Nick" and posted his accusations to an offshore Web site. The Met trashed Bramall's home (finding nothing), and then kept him under suspicion, saying, "we don't have enough evidence to prosecute yet, but we're still uncovering more." In the end, the Met had to issue a formal apology, but it was too late for Bramall's wife, who died in the meantime, going to her grave thinking that her husband might be a child sex predator. The Met didn't issue an apology until after an investigation by a special committee exposed the fact that the investigation was politically motivated and there was never any evidence other than "Nick"'s word.

"Rape is a serious crime of violence, of course, but surely the same civilised, redemptive attitude should apply to this crime as to others."
________________________________________

I agree.

And - beautifully said, Ppen. Especially the first paragraph.

Any society in any part of the world will indignantly claim that it is not "pro-rape," just because CERTAIN women are both legally and socially off-limits. Namely, other men's wives and women walking in groups on the street, at minimum. Or any woman who's never unchaperoned. Otherwise...depends where you live. Even within the US.

Not to mention that while unpopular boys and men will always be under suspicion, fairly or not, everyone's heard of jocks, rich boys/men, etc., getting fiercely protected by their mini-societies whenever they attack someone "lower" than themselves. (Think Glen Ridge, NJ, 1989 - I trust no one OUTSIDE of that town really sympathized with the felons.) Or: "The poor rich guys can't help themselves - they aren't USED to hearing anyone say no!"

In another thread, I said:

...it would be ludicrous and childish to argue that violent racism - or basic discrimination - exists only within white supremacist organizations. It's everywhere. In the same vein, it wasn't so many decades ago (in the US) that a woman raped by an acquaintance couldn't really hope for a conviction if she was neither a virgin or married. (Yes, even divorcees were considered morally suspect, not so long ago.) Just because it's always been considered horribly wrong to rape women from the first two categories doesn't mean that other women haven't been considered fair game, unofficially, for centuries - and in many communities, they still are...

...and if you're wondering just how widespread racist organizations are, here's a map from last year:

https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map

You know what the answer is. I'll paraphrase you:

It is a way for women to gain unearned power over others, generally men but eventually other women.

The reason hasn't changed. The methods by which to gain said power may change.

Also: the SLPC is a hate group.

Yeah, the SPLC classifies anyone with opinions to the right of their own as a hate group. Ppen is right in that, historically, rape is a crime that the wealthy and powerful usually get away with, especially when the women in question is of a lower caste. Heck, we have that here in the U.S. now -- Bill Clinton, ahem. The extreme form of this occurs in polygamous societies, in which the most powerful men view all of the society's women as being their property, to use as they see fit. What current culture does that sound like?

A timely, 100% bullshit email I got from school today.

"CT Student Affairs

Reply all
|

Mon 10/17, 4:38 PM
l_students

Dear Students,

Did you know that 1/2 of all stalkings are not reported? That 4 out of every 5 rapes are not reported? Or that 3/4 of all physical assaults are not reported? 69.4 million people will experience intimate partner violence in their lifetime.
 
October is Intimate Partner Violence Awareness month. In the time you are in one class each day, over 1,500 people will be hurt by intimate partner violence. The Division of Student Affairs has placed 1,500 purple flags in front of Warrior Hall to represent each person's experience. TAMUCT cares about its students and we support a culture of reporting. If someone in our community experiences intimate partner violence, we encourage them to break the silence. Anyone in our community can report an act of intimate partner violence to the following: 
·         Title IX Coordinator, Deserie Rivera (d.rivera@tamuct.edu, 519.5722); 
·         Associate Dean of Student Affairs and Deputy Title IX Coordinator, Paul York (pyork@tamuct.edu, 501-5877); or,
·         TAMUCT PD (501-5800 or 911). 
·         Anonymous reporting can be done to http://www.tamuct.edu/departments/security/silentwitness.php
 
Learn more about just some of what the institution does at this address: https://www.tamuct.edu/departments/sharp/index.php

Confidential reports can be made to the University Counseling Center. If you see something, say something. Save a life. 

Paul York
Associate Dean of Student Affairs and
Deputy Title IX Coordinator
Getting too much email from CT Student Affairs ? You can unsubscribe "

I'm paying tuyition, because I need this next degree. But I'll never donate a red cent to them.

Related (via the InstaWife):

Trigger warning: Over at the College Fix, there is a disturbing article entitled "Students told term ‘be a man’ represents toxic masculinity":

https://pjmedia.com/drhelen/2016/10/19/are-colleges-making-our-young-men-sick/

Is there any other kind of masculinity on a progressive campus?

I'm paying tuyition, because I need this next degree. But I'll never donate a red cent to them.

Good for you, momof4. I'd contemplated adding the mothership (TAMU) to my list of groups I support, but I'll take a pass on them unless it is for very specific purposes.

'[Wo]men who have [made false rape accusations]... need to see their lives reduced to ash' (burn them!). Even when they're released their lives should be made 'publicly, endlessly awful, unrelentingly humiliating, without prospect of absolution',

Yeah, that sounds about right.

@Lenona: What's your point? Are you admitting in a roundabout way that you're a racist? Ok, but don't try to put your turd in anyone else's pocket.

A category on the "Hate Map" is "racist music".

Shirley, this is not "rap music" 'cause that's a Black cultural thingy.

(If you are not Shirley I'd like your opinion as well.)

Also: the SPLC is a hate group.
________________________________________

Proof, please? Not to mention - which of the organizations on the map do you think shouldn't be listed as hate groups? (Note that it DID include Black Separatist groups - they're the ones with the white stars. Click the arrow on "All Groups" to see a list.) However, it does not include MRA organizations, though from what they've said about MRAs, they could easily change the map soon - but maybe MRAs just aren't organized enough to qualify as "groups."

To Jay R: I don't get your question. My point was that if blatantly racist organizations are so common in the country, it should hardly be a surprise that more casual (if only slightly more casual) racism is everywhere and so it's foolish to argue that we're in a "post-race" society. Even WITHOUT the more casual racists. (E.g., those who lock up people of color for drug possession twice as often as whites.) In the same vein, given that marital rape used to be legal 40 years ago (and so was the rape of prostitutes, unofficially) and people like the late Phyllis Schlafly (and her thousands of fans) SAID, in recent years, in effect, that she still didn't see anything wrong with the old laws, pro-rape attitudes definitely STILL exist in all sorts of forms and communities - provided only certain women are targeted.

And in past decades, even preteen(!) victims could get blamed for (sarcasm) tempting poor, helpless (sarcasm) strangers to attack them. See here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/15/opinion/the-assault-allegations-against-donald-trump.html

It's the third letter down and it begins with:

"Many seem to wonder why women who have experienced sexual assault do not report the assault immediately, thus making the claims questionable.

"I, as a 12-year-old walking home from school, was followed by a man who sexually assaulted me just outside my home. I told my mother when she returned from work, she called the police, and I, with an immense sense of embarrassment and shame, told the police what had happened..."

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/28/editorial-the-fbi-dumps-a-hate-group/

Perhaps this is what IRA Darth Aggie is referring to.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/28/editorial-the-fbi-dumps-a-hate-group/

Perhaps this is what IRA Darth Aggie is referring to.

Lenona, the SPLC lists the mainstream conservative Family Research Council and Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch (which tracks instances of Islamic-inspired violence) as hate groups. Here's a link. They also listed Pamela Geller's old Web site, Atlas Shrugs, as a hate Web site. Geller's crime is that she is a passionate defender of Israel. Not coincidentally, both Geller and the Family Research Council have been subject to violent assaults by leftists, neither of which the SPLC bothered to condemn. On the other hand, the SPLC does not consider the Nation of Islam or the Muslim Brotherhood hate groups.

the SPLC lists the mainstream conservative Family Research Council
____________________________________

With someone like Tony Perkins as president, why am I not surprised?

From Wikipedia:

"Perkins believes natural disasters are divine punishments for homosexuality. When Perkins' own home was flooded in August 2016, news outlets noted the irony."

He's also been accused (by more than one person)of encouraging parents of gay teens to reject them - which would likely increase the teens' already very high rates of suicide, as he pretends not to know. So far, I've found this article by Perkins on gay suicide (from 2010):

https://www.onfaith.co/onfaith/2010/10/11/christian-compassion-requires-the-truth-about-harms-of-homosexuality/324

"...Since homosexual conduct is associated with higher rates of sexual promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases, mental illness, substance abuse, and domestic violence, it too qualifies as a behavior that is harmful to the people who engage in it and to society at large. It is not loving to encourage someone to indulge in such activities, no matter how much sensual pleasure they may derive from them. It is more loving to help them overcome them. This is why, in the public policy arena, we will continue to oppose any policy or action that would celebrate or affirm homosexual conduct."

One response:

danny7 • 6 years ago
"Mr. Perkins, it's apparent that you haven't had any real world experience in a school in a while. If you had, you wouldn't have stated "I suspect that few, if any, such bullies are people who regularly attend church, and I would not be surprised if most of the "bullies" did not have the positive benefit of both an active mom and dad in their lives." I attended a private Christian school (4th through 12th grade) where attendance at church was required both during and outside of school. Parents at the school were deeply involved in their kids' Christian upbringing, yet bullying in regard to sexual orientation was an every day occurrence. The school administration did try to minimize this, but in the end, it was the Christian values that their parents imparted to them that drove these kids to bully others. If you teach a kid that his classmate is an abomination, do you really think he will sit next to him at the lunch table or treat him with respect? No, he will do what all kids do: they will do their best to fit in with what they see as normal, and will attack others who do not fit that norm to keep them out. Telling kids that someone is not normal will only increase this tendency to bully. I can tell you from experience, Christian schools with Christian parents and values perform no better in regard to bullying."

And:

Andrewmilbauer • 6 years ago
"...You are completely in your rights to believe what you will about us. I take offense to you taking National Coming Out Day to step again on your bully pulpit. It is the goal of the GLBTQ community that all youth are treated with compassion and acceptance. You took this day to tell us once again that we are prone to issues with mental health. You fail to realize that your words are the ones that marginalize us, oppress us, harm us, and even tell our parents to kick us out of the home if we come out and refuse reparative therapy. One of the greatest predictors of suicide ideation in GLBTQ youth is familial/caregiver rejection {Ryan, C., Huebner, D., Diaz, R, and Sanchez, J. (2009). Family Rejection as a Predictor of Negative Health Outcomes in White and Latino Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Young Adults. PEDIATRICS Vol. 123 No. 1 January 2009, pp. 346-352."

And while Perkins has denied that the FRC seeks to criminalize homosexual behavior, Peter S. Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the FRC, said, in 2010, on NBC, that "criminal sanctions against homosexual behavior" should be enforced.
___________________________________

On the other hand, the SPLC does not consider the Nation of Islam or the Muslim Brotherhood hate groups.
______________________________________

Maybe you didn't click on a few of the Black Separatist groups I mentioned. Many have "Nation of Islam" right at the top. Underneath each individual title is the name of the city each group is located in, followed by "Black Separatist." One, in MN, is listed first as "The Israelite Church of God in Jesus Christ." Another, in MS, is "New Black Panther Party."
_________________________________________

From the Washington Times op-ed:

The SPLC never identifies the hate groups about to engulf the land, who they are or where they are assembling their regiments of engulfers. With the Ku Klux Klan shrinking to insignificance,
_____________________________________

Um, the map seems to contradict that. And with the Internet, what makes anyone think that the KKK is diminishing, or that there aren't new white supremacist groups, just as bad, to replace them?

And, from Media Matters:

"The Washington Times repeated the myth that the FBI has ended its relationship with the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), ignoring that the FBI had already debunked that claim and distorting SPLC's work against domestic hate groups..."

"...SPLC DOESN'T considering opposing marriage equality to be a hate crime. The SPLC has identified extreme anti-gay organizations like the Family Research Council (FRC) and American Family Association (AFA) as hate groups because they peddle anti-LGBT smears and misinformation, not because they oppose marriage equality. Despite its strident anti-gay stances, for instance, even the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) isn't on the SPLC's list of hate groups.

"Meanwhile, the Times' claim that the FBI chose to "sever [its] connection" with the SPLC is merely the latest sign that the paper's editorial board is impervious to facts, particularly when it comes to LGBT issues.

"While right-wing media gleefully pounced on the FBI's decision to remove non-government organizations from a list of 'resource' groups on a civil rights page, that decision applied to all non-government organizations, including groups like the Anti-Defamation League, equally. The bureau's website still lists the SPLC as a 'public outreach' partner in the fight against hate crimes. Days before the Times published its editorial, the FBI contradicted the right-wing media narrative that by telling the Daily Caller that the bureau continues to receive support 'from a variety of organizations,' but had simply 'elected not to identify those groups on the civil rights page.'

"Nowhere in its editorial did the Times even acknowledge that the FBI had corrected the record..."

"Also, the question needs to be asked, that once a person has done time -- completed the punishment assigned them by the justice system -- what then?"

Well, chances are they'll be back...

There's no choice. You don't have one. You must defend yourself.

Yes, it does mean a rape took place.

So to summarize Lenona's enormous data dump, if the SPLC says someone is a hate group, then they are, period. Lenona, it's nice to know that you agree with suppressing the opinions of people who disagree with you. It changes how I will respond to you here in the future.

I REALLY don't know how you got either of those ideas. I was merely pointing out that you didn't know what you were talking about when you said that the SPLC does not include the Nation of Islam as a hate group - and that for the moment, at least, they're not about to put just anyone (like MRAs) on the map, if only for mathematical reasons. That shows a certain self-restraint on the part of the SPLC.

And once again, which groups do not belong on the map and WHY? I've already given the reasons why the FRC has likely earned a spot on the map. What's wrong with those reasons?

If you think you have good reasons to say that the SPLC is grossly unfair in multiple cases, I'd be happy to hear what they are.

Oh, forgot to say: I, for one, am not about to vote for any politician who has expressed hatred (as in "peddling anti-LGBT smears and misinformation"), if there's someone else who would be a good president but who doesn't do that. When people are bigoted against one group only, they shouldn't be surprised when they get called bigots and haters. Same goes for the FRC. Being openly gay does not hurt others.

I've already given the reasons why the FRC has likely earned a spot on the map. What's wrong with those reasons?
______________________________

To clarify: I had already found them on the map - in Washington, DC.