Good for you. However, the standard definition does not exclude genitalia.
You full well know that the sniffles does not have anything to do with impairment. I would also like a source that says that touching someone while either of you are impaired is rape. Drunken hookups are common, and clearly people are not being arrested and prosecuted for drunken hookups. So you really need to source that claim.
That would be absurd. It also seems to be irrelevant to the Steubenville case.
You would have an easier time understanding the story if you actually read any of the accounts of what happened.
That is quite possible, though I doubt we will ever know.
There is something very wrong with you, ToxicAssets. There were accounts that the victim was unconscious, and not only that, there was video and photo evidence that she had been unconscious. This isn’t a situation where a girl consented and then passed out. She passed out, was carried out by the teen boys, and then they raped her.
Perhaps there’s something wrong with me, but as I’ve said, I’m basing my analysis on a single piece of information, which is the following timeline on wikipedia.
Of course the piece above already depicts it as a so-called “rape”, but the factual information contained seems to tell otherwise.
Now you’re adding that there were witnesses that the girl was unconscious, and that should be taken in consideration in the investigation. But even that needs to be evaluated more rationally.
If there were a real rape situation, it would hardly be because of tweets about pissing in a semi-awake girl. Nobody is that stupid. It would be because of something much graver.
These teenagers (including the girl) clearly seem to have let a party situation get out of hand, and some of the kids obviously crossed the line, and moronically bragged about raping the girl, but still, there was no rape.
Of course, you can always call such things “rape”, but that’s removes the perspective of things, because a bunch of drunken kids acting stupid become linguistically equivalent to criminally insane aggressors.
Like when a 30 y.o. dude, without knowing her age, bangs a consenting 17 y.o. girl, and in some states that’s a crime called “statutory rape”. This is completely ridiculous.
Anyway, I’m not saying that no lines were crossed and nobody should be punished. I’m just saying that a bunch of drunken kids acting stupid and criminally insane aggressors are two different things.
The facts that the girl was hurt nor dumped somewhere, but woke up next to the supposed aggressors, and even that these kids were moronically bragging about the whole thing on tweets and txts, all seems to point in the direction that there was no substantial crime being perpetrated.
Of course some investigation is necessary and facts should be collected.
But, so far as the facts seem to go, to classify this thing as rape seems more like an instance of the usual tactic of deploying hyperbolical language by the media in order to create scandals and blow things out of proportion.
Everybody knows that wild parties in high schools and colleges sometimes can get too crazy, but it is important to keep things in perspective, specially considering that nobody was found dead or severely hurt.
Again, I’m operating on little information, all I know is the timeline as it is described in wikipedia today.
I think the wider point that ToxicAssets is making is generally sound - pointing at the behavior of a specific group of kids and then drawing conclusions about culture is… just completely retarded. Culture is precisely what kids don’t have. They (rightly) have the smallest voice in shaping the wider culture and are primarily shaped by it, rather than the other way around. The narrative that Steubenville is some kind of indication that “we have a rape culture” - coming out of the radical, postmodern feminist camp - presupposes that these kids are culture-shapers. As I said, it’s just completely retarded.
They (rightly) have the smallest voice in shaping the wider culture and are primarily shaped by it, rather than the other way around. The narrative that Steubenville is some kind of indication that “we have a rape culture” - coming out of the radical, postmodern feminist camp - presupposes that these kids are culture-shapers. As I said, it’s just completely retarded.
If they are shaped by culture and percieve the world in this way and express these views, don’t you think the culture that is shaping them is the reason why they think this way?
Are you saying teenagers do not take influence from their peers and pop culture? If teenagers are becoming influenced by, for example, music, film, television, and other related pop culture - that is generally orchestrated by adults - then wouldn’t they be influenced by their culture?
Which singer, songwriter, actor, playwright, director, producer, etc., incited these two particular teenagers to rape another teenager? It was Will Smith, wasn’t it? I knew rappers were bad news.
Also we don’t have much of a culture just in general. To my mind there isn’t anything like a positive rape culture out there. What there is a deep-seated crisis of values in general and the corresponding lack of culture as such.
The distinction between a rape of a drunk girl and a drunken orgy is important in the sense that the former is punishable under the natural rights theory where the latter is not. However, from the point of view of culture they are both degrading and are made possible by the same lack of values.
You can see this most clearly from the bragging about these incidents (of either varieties). To ToxicAssets this bragging and recording is an indication that likely no crime had been commited, and to Bert it is an indication there is a positive rape culture out there. To me both these claims seem very thinly supported. What it certainly is an indication of, is a crisis of the concept of say honor, self-control, dignity and shame. We can’t know what precisely happened for each of these incidents (was it crime, or non-crime?), but we know that whatever did take place, these youths regularly publish what a cultured person would not do in the first place, and if, would have kept a tightly protected dirty secret.
An instance of rape culture, or an instance of no-culture?
First of all, what? A cold or a fever can be just as impairing as being drunk, not to mention the drugs you might take to relieve their symptoms. Second of all, whether you think the sniffles has anything to do with being impaired has nothing to do with what the legal system will accept, and both that and being drunk share the convenience that by the time legal proceeedings begin, they’ll be long gone. So it boils down to a guessing game.
You have Google, look it up for yourself. You will find instances where men were charged and/or convicted of rape when both parties were drunk, and you will certainly find that most interested parties believe that situation to be rape if the woman says it was. The rape crisis lines will tell any woman that calls that the only standard to justify a rape claim is that the woman says she was impaired.
Is it? Do we have some source that proves unequivocally that the boys were not themselves drunk?
The sniffles are not a fever, for which you could possibly have had a point about cognitive impairment. Alas, seeing as the sniffles have nothing to do with cognitive impairment, you just wasting all of our time.
Again with the trolling. My actually statement was this:
I am waiting for the source that says, “[T]he law says touching someone who is “impaired” is rape.” My response is directly relevant to that claim. Quit wasting our time with cut and paste hack jobs.
Is that what I said? Would not a more accurate reading be that the girl herself has not been accused of raping the two boys?
I guess the troll got what it wanted…I responded to a troll post.
This really sounds good at first, but then I fail to distill anything concrete or useful from such an abstract complaint about a “lacking culture”.
I don’t see how a situation like the one depicted here can warrant such grandiose claims about culture or the lack thereof.
I just see an isolate case of drunken kids acting really stupid, with the difference that now we have powerful internet channels that broadcast their actions and blow these things out of any reasonable proportion.
so all of that means the thread isnt over? I daresay, what are we talking about then? would you prefer your own words that say the same thing without referencing the op’s argument?
Wow you went from rational argumentation to overreactive ad hominem in the blink of an eye. Good showing, gotlucky. Seriously, do you take medication of some kind? Every one of your responses today in this thread have been almost completely off your norm.
You’re in no better position to define “the sniffles” than I am, which is the point. It’s also why your haphazard dismissal of it is not only mystifying, it’s wrong.
And my point to you did nothing to take away from what you said, so how you define that as “trolling” is beyond me. And who says there needs to be a specific law that says “touching someone while either of you are impaired is rape”? Legal justification under the rape statutes is all that’s required, that does not require any such specific definition, which is part of why rape laws are so dangerous.
Well, Baxter said, “If two people are impaired…are they each committing rape on one another? This seems to be absurd.” to which you replied, “That would be absurd. It also seems to be irrelevant to the Steubenville case.” Given the facts of the case, we know that the girl was extremely inebriated, so in order for Baxter’s statement to be irrelevant, you would have to be claiming that her rapists were not drunk, no? As far as I know, those facts have not been spoken about.
And if they were drunk (and on this I’m sure you agree) then how to do we justify excusing one’s behavior due to alcohol and not the other’s?
Your entire post was uncharitable to everything I had said. In fact, it appears like it was actually a delibrate misrepresentation. You off your meds?
I can’t understand what you just said. Please define the following:
You’re, in, no, better, position, to, define, the, sniffles, than, I, am, which, is, point, it’s, also, why, your [sic], haphazard, dismissal, of, it, not, only, mystifying, wrong.
“Who says there needs to be a specific law that says…”
“Legal justification under the rape statutes is all that’s required…”
Dude, quit trolling.
Ah, someone trying to save face after a dumbass post. Look, I agreed with him that it would be absurd, but it is irrelevant to the Steubenville case. I would say reread my response to you, but evidently I can’t expect you to try and represent my posts accurately. You see, the girl was never accused of raping the two boys. Whether the boys were drunk or sober is irrelevant. The girl was never accused of raping them, so his comment was irrelevant to the Steubenville case.