Up Front: All Together Now
291 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 12 Newer→ Last
-
I mean that while nobody likes sitting around in an office all day in order to keep food on the table, it generally isn't thought of as being as bad as having sex you don't necessarily want in order to keep food on the table.
I'm going to be middle-class and naive for a moment, but I don't think there are a lot of people in New Zealand whose choices are sex work or actual starvation. Hardship/unpleasantness, yes. Actual starvation...probably not.
Prostitution is a very situational debate; there are situations where it is, basically, rape, and there are situations where it is nothing of the sort, and any argument which tries to argue that all prostitution, everywhere, is rape, is basically arguing that no woman, no matter what her situation, can consent to sex for money. And that, as Emma has repeatedly pointed out, denies women any right to speak for themselves on the matter, which is...not good.
(Also, there is a *huge* difference between sex you don't necessarily want and rape. I've had sex I didn't necessarily want to have at the time, but nevertheless consented to for reasons other than wanting to have sex, and I cannot possibly believe that it was in any way at all the same thing as being raped.)
-
But that's the difficulty: you are asserting that prostitutes consent, while the counter-argument is that the consent is given under duress and not particularly meaningful. You can't settle it by referring back to the consent unless you want to chuck out duress* altogether.
I think you've transferred the duress of a person being poor, to the person buying sex. Which may be valid if the person buying sex also the person that made you poor (ie, a pimp), but normally won't be.
The fact that person A has money, and person B needs money, doesn't mean person A is applying duress to person B. The problem in the equation is that person B doesn't have money, not that person A is willing to pay for sex. Unless they're lying or complete fools, there are plenty of sex workers who publicly state that they do that job because they enjoy it, or enjoy the money, lifestyle etc. Who are we to tell them they're wrong and are all under duress?
-
At what point does the alleged rape victim get a representative that actually does do everything they can to prove the case?
Not in terms of prosecuting the case that I'm aware of. Victim Support, Rape Crisis etc will sometimes provide support people to help rape victims get through trials, but they don't have legal standing.
-
At what point does the alleged rape victim get a representative that actually does do everything they can to prove the case?
They don't. Just as a victim of an armed robbery doesn't, nor a victim of any other crime. Which is not to say that the prosecutor, and cops aren't trying damn hard to secure a conviction, just that in there pursuit of a conviction other factors do have a (usually small) part to play.
-
Ah, found it. Renegade Evolution on consent and rape in prostitution and pornography - both jobs she has actually done.
If a person does not have the ultimate authority to decide when they have not been raped, then by default that authority is also in question when they decide they have been raped. And that is an authority that should not ever be put in question in either scenario, because it then denies that persons authority in all arenas and renders any choice or decision they make absolutely worthless and subject to disbelief. And that shit? That shit there is a soul-killer.
...
It’s the blanket assertion that the women (all of them) in porn (all of it), are, in the course of filming porn, being raped. This bothers me for so many reasons. Chief among them, I really do think overuse of the word rape cheapens it. I really do. I think it’s an insult to women who really have been raped to liken what happened to them to what goes on with a consenting woman who makes pornography. It also is incredibly insulting and agency denying to the consenting woman who does make pornography.
-
Group sex with 6 Irish men? That's my idea of A Party!
-
@emma and Renegade Evolution
I can see the point of view that if I feel violated no matter what a court or anyone else says I have the right to that view and no one can tell me otherwise
some concerned comments over there echo my view that it is a very big step to make that because you hold that view everyone else is required to hold it to with out further evidance.
There are people who for various reasons lie about being raped. Are we to send innocent people down to ensure we get all the guilty ones?
-
Group sex with 6 Irish men? That's my idea of A Party!
To be sure,to be sure! (Sorry couldn't resist.Why can't I be serious sometime? ) ;)
-
There are people who for various reasons lie about being raped. Are we to send innocent people down to ensure we get all the guilty ones?
Ren does actually mention people who lie about being raped when they haven't, and not being raped when they have. But I don't think anybody said anything even remotely close to that. What she in particular is asking for is the right to be the person with the most authority on whether she has been raped or not in a civil context. I don't agree with everything she says, but I wanted to show how angry it makes her, having her agency taken away in that fashion.
For myself, seeing as you were talking to both of us, no, I don't take that view, I find that idea absolutely abhorrent. But I think you knew that.
-
Thanks for your reply emma. In fact Deb does talk about this more in the comments...
Ideas around this get very complicated when the law is involved.
Your idea around not being able to say no if you can't freely say yes is a good one I think.
its like second wave femanists being annyoyed at 3rd wave feminsts becaue having won thier freedom they choose to wear short skirts.
If people have free choice you have to live with the choices they make even if they bloody piss you off.
-
I hate how the discussion (obviously excepting Tatchell and the one here) is completely oblivious to the fact that in our society, entering into a sexual experience with someone you don't know might be complicated. You might have different boundaries in different circumstances. With more than one person, you might even have more boundaries.
And obviously, it also ignores the fact that one has the right to say no at any time, to any person, for any reason whatsoever, no matter what has happened previously. And the converse of this is the right to say yes. I think one of the reasons why people, primarily women but also men, are so cautious about their sexual choices is that they don't want to be put into a position where they don't have the ability to make the choices they want.
-
Emma, I agree with your position about the right to determine whether you consent or not.
On the flipside, I think we have a real issue relevant to men actively ascertaining whether a woman has (and continues) to consent.
I think the media, in continuing to support the notion that most rapes are carried out violent sexual predators who have never met the victim, have created an environment where some men can compare their behaviour to an extreme (and non-typical) type of rapist and conclude that since they didn't act like a stalker, how can it have been rape ?
We (being society) need to move the underlying meme from "no consent = rape" to "sex = respect". Rape will always be abhorrent, and I'm not trying to undermine the affect it has on survivors, but I can't help but conclude that, while empowering victims is extremely important, the factor that needs to be addressed is men's attitudes. And I believe the most effective way to do this is to move the discussion away from legalistic critical events (consent), and towards why it is important to treat their sexual partners with respect.
-
What concerns me about this case is what it means for people in the future. This woman was detailing a fantasy and because of that her credibility was destroyed, that's terribly worrying to me. I would say that most people have fantasies that we would never want in actuality, is it safe to tell people these now? It seems not.
What's more with modern forms of communication there's a record of conversation, txt and the internet live forever. This points to me to be a literal 'get out of jail free' card provided someone said that the other person fantasised about a sexual situation.
Even if there is a lot more to this case than what we are told, the reporting still puts out the lesson that if you tell someone you want a certain sexual act, then you are consenting to any future sex, even if in reality you don't want to do it. :(
-
Even if there is a lot more to this case than what we are told, the reporting still puts out the lesson that if you tell someone you want a certain sexual act, then you are consenting to any future sex, even if in reality you don't want to do it. :(
And if people, judges for goodness sake, can't comprehend that, or think that a trial will fall apart because a jury can't comprehend that, then how are they going to comprehend the fact that you could spell out a fantasy in front of someone in the bedroom, and at the point you made clear that you'd withdrawn your consent you've withdrawn your consent. Nobody has a right to your body, and talking about what you'd like to do with your body doesn't give anyone that right.
-
3410,
I don't know that we're stuck with the implications of this debacle. Surely, the judge's comments - and probably the prosecutor's comments - were a mistake.
... but, why has this apparently not become a bigger story?
-
One thing that it helps to bear in mind when discussing criminal consequences for rape is that a rape trial is not about determining whether there was consent - a rape trial is about determining whether there is a reasonable possibility there was consent. Being only pretty damn sure there was consent means the defendant is properly found not guilty.
-
Rape is sexual congress without implicit or explicit consent. This woman alleged she was raped by six men, but the case did not go ahead because she had previously been online talking of fantasies of group sex. Is that a reasonable summation of the facts? I do not understand why this case was not prosecuted. It seems to me that prejudicial assumptions were made about this woman by the people who were supposed to be acting for her, or against the men, in any case. I'm stumped.
-
This mirrors the Tauranga Police pretty closely & I don't think it would be passed out of court here as it was in the UK.
To ignore the sex act for a moment, she must have been held against her will at some point, being a day long ordeal.
I expect, regardless of charges being successful or not had this happened in NZ she would receive some ACC assistance?
-
It seems to me that prejudicial assumptions were made about this woman by the people who were supposed to be acting for her, or against the men, in any case. I'm stumped.
The evidence was presented by the defence, after their clients had been in custody for 6 months.
It would have helped the prosecution if she had made the online activity known to them in that 6 months before the trial, but she didn't. She lied (by omission) to the prosecution in a case in which her success was entirely dependent them proving her to be credible beyond any reasonable doubt. What else could the prosecution have done?
-
I feel uncomfortable discussing such cases, since we usually do not have all the facts. The prosecution has a role - to prosecute - so the evidence must be pretty harmful for it to decide to abandon its case after six months.
-
There are people who for various reasons lie about being raped. Are we to send innocent people down to ensure we get all the guilty ones?
No, Tristan, and I don't see anyone here saying any such thing. I'd actually be presumptuous enough to assume the PAS hive mind :) would join me in regarding false allegations of any sexual or violent offending (for whatever reason) with a pretty dim eye.
And no, it is not better that a hundred innocent people get stigmatised and incarcerated as convicted rapists than one guilty man goes free. I'd just like some people (including those whose job is to investigate and prosecute rape cases) to get a grip on the idea that getting gang banged, being open to the idea or just rubbing one off while fantasising about it doesn't make you a dirty whore who is just asking for it.
-
It would have helped the prosecution if she had made the online activity known to them in that 6 months before the trial, but she didn't. She lied (by omission) to the prosecution in a case in which her success was entirely dependent them proving her to be credible beyond any reasonable doubt. What else could the prosecution have done?
It depends exactly what it was she said online. If all she did was discuss her group sex fantasy, then why should she disclose that to the prosecution? It should be irrelevant.
-
It would have helped the prosecution if she had made the online activity known to them in that 6 months before the trial, but she didn't. She lied (by omission) to the prosecution in a case in which her success was entirely dependent them proving her to be credible beyond any reasonable doubt. What else could the prosecution have done?
I'm with Paul on not wanting to discuss it without all the facts, but is it possible rather than lying by omission, she just didn't realise it was relevant?
-
The CPS policy on prosecuting rape is interesting reading.
Being involved in the criminal prosecution process (fortunately rarely in matters as unpleasant as this) I never cease to be amazed at the odd choices made by prosecutors, often due to external pressures.
e.g. this one may have had a dozen cases on the go - and chose to effectively drop this one to focus on the others. The public service is all about rationing...
-
CPS policy on prosecuting rape
"It is an offence for a man to rape a woman or another man... "
As a code for prosecution it does appear to start off in an old fashioned restrictive manner?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.