Not if it was consensual.
group sex, is it rape?
- Thread starter Asguard
- Start date
What if the what was consensual?
I like yer avatar. <3
I like yer avatar. <3
The group sex, of course. I mean, you either agree to partake in such actions, or you don't. If you don't and you're being forced into partaking in it, then it could be considered as rape. Probably. Depending on what they used you for in that "group sex".
And you've got some sexy boots there.
And you've got some sexy boots there.
Ehhh, I dunno. I'd be okay with my boyfriend's friends watching us have sex if he insisted and I agreed beforehand (but I wouldn't be thrilled), but I would feel violated if another guy just jumped in. I think that's what happened here.
There's the little matter of consent that you appear to have ignored. What, exactly, did she agree to, and what was she expecting when she went back to her room with two players?
You assume that the testimony of one "ex-friend" of hers is accurate and unbiased. Why?
Another misogynist with double standards. How surprising.
*yawn*
"dumb bitch" eh?
What's your problem with women, exactly?
Why are the men absolved of all blame? Because men can't be expected to control their penises?
You need to take a good hard look at yourself.
If I've commented on your sexual life as you've described it, then I didn't intend to. Normally I wouldn't... and without looking over it all again here, I don't think I have. I merely made a small comment on one of my experiences without going into detail, and I'm not going to go into that detail with people I don't know.
If you mean with regard to this particular instance, that I don't know what happened in that hotel room - then neither do you. But it's in the public domain now. Hence this discussion.
Come on, Tak - you're not this naive. Or maybe it's a geographical thing, and American girls don't. But girls follow sports teams around all the time over here looking to fuck one or two of them. It's quite common. They get on the phone with each other and give "the goss" as to which high-profile media star/sports star/rich people are where, so they can show up in the same place in the hope of meeting them.
In this instance, she turned up at a pub where she knew they'd be. That's all.
They were visitors to her town.
Girls here will fuck a guy they've never met before because he owns a nice car - I know one who's making a collection of Porsche owners. She meets wealthy-looking guys in nightclubs, finds out what they drive, gets them to take her to it and open the doors to prove it's theirs, and then they have her in it and never see her again. She's fairly particular - most of her friends don't limit themselves to one type of expensive car.
Nor do they bother getting to know the guy first.
You misunderstood. I was surmising that if you're right and she was... paralysed, then that would be a weaker mind. Wouldn't it. We both know there are girls who have dealt with situations like this one far more effectively. Assuming you're right and she wasn't a willing participant.
And if she didn't have the strength to assert herself there, then she's probably not going to go against whatever the media/her supporters are saying either - particularly when it gives her an "out".
But none of this has much point anymore... We're not going to agree on much here anyway. You're arguing it one way, I'm arguing another.
Rarely shall the twain meet.
However, this I want to talk about.
We certainly do in the case of the female. It is a more of society that women are painted generally as being innocent. Coerced. Too afraid to go against the partner's wishes, what have you. It's quite common.
There are still thousands in England today campaigning for Myra Hindley's release. Karla Homolka in the US. Catherine Birnie in Australia. Whoever you want to name, guilty women assumed to be innocent. All they need do is be a good enough actor to make people believe something all of them want to be true - that they were never willing participants in whatever they'd done.
And I'd lay money on any of those examples actually believing, now and after all this time, that they were coerced, regardless of what the circumstances were at the time. They've told the same story, to so many people, it has become truth in their eyes as well.
Human psychology is fascinating. The past is only that which you can make yourself believe it was. Or anyone else.
No one wants to believe a woman is guilty of anything, unless the proof is incontrovertible. They will find a thousand reasons or assume a thousand reasons why she isn't. They will excuse her any way they can.
There are a hundred people here reading this thread whose first instinct is to assume rape, rather than assume she's not telling the truth. There are only a handful who won't. Look at the female high school teachers who have had sex with their students, and how they're treated differently to males who do it.
In all cases, the young female student is presumed innocent of all wrongdoing. The males almost invariably go to prison.
The female teachers do not, and the talk is of their "relationships" with their young male students, not statutory rape and what warped predatory bitches they were who should have their tits cut off.
Let me ask you a question - or rather, ask yourself one.
Why was "Thelma and Louise" a hit movie? Do you think it would have been as successful had the two leads been male?
And you be honest now.
Last edited:
Actually, she worked at the hotel. They turned up.
Have you considered the possibility that, just maybe, the woman here is telling the truth?
Why do you assume she's not telling the truth? Isn't that equally as bad?
Interesting poll results. The question in the poll was "Is this rape?", which I interpret to mean this particular situation with the footballers etc. My answer is "It depends."
What I find interesting is that 30 people (so far) have jumped to the conclusion that no, this couldn't possibly have been rape. It's like they somehow magically know that the woman in the case consented to sex with the whole football team. Either that, or they assume she was "up for it".
I'd hate to be the woman in this case and have sciforums members on the jury, if it ever got to court. The notion of looking at the evidence objectively seems to be largely absent here.
What I find interesting is that 30 people (so far) have jumped to the conclusion that no, this couldn't possibly have been rape. It's like they somehow magically know that the woman in the case consented to sex with the whole football team. Either that, or they assume she was "up for it".
I'd hate to be the woman in this case and have sciforums members on the jury, if it ever got to court. The notion of looking at the evidence objectively seems to be largely absent here.
James, to me "is it rape" meant is it rape legally, not is it rape morally. There are two questions here. Did any of the guys rape her and was she raped. If the guys thought they had consent could they be guilty of rape? Can she be raped if their was no rapist? She probably had things done to her that were against her will but did the guys know?
Their are classes of people like minors and people intoxicated beyond some threshold who can not legally give consent and in those cases whether the guys believed she gave consent would not matter. This was not one of those cases.
Being stupid is not a usable defense in most crimes (other than the crimes committed by Wall Street executives). Perhaps these guys should have known and and semi-consciously did know that they were doing things to this girl against her will. Is that enough knowledge to convict them of rape?
I thinks courts have required a clearer withholding of consent than what happened in this case before convicting somebody of rape. Morally this may have been a rape but legally I don't think a jury should convict these guys. I think the "I was to stupid to read her body language defense" is a valid defense.
Their are classes of people like minors and people intoxicated beyond some threshold who can not legally give consent and in those cases whether the guys believed she gave consent would not matter. This was not one of those cases.
Being stupid is not a usable defense in most crimes (other than the crimes committed by Wall Street executives). Perhaps these guys should have known and and semi-consciously did know that they were doing things to this girl against her will. Is that enough knowledge to convict them of rape?
I thinks courts have required a clearer withholding of consent than what happened in this case before convicting somebody of rape. Morally this may have been a rape but legally I don't think a jury should convict these guys. I think the "I was to stupid to read her body language defense" is a valid defense.
Last edited:
No, never mind.
For;
I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
Know all there is to know about things animal and vegetable.
My opinions are well rounded, and I know how to dress,
For my mother always said to me
A well-dressed man is best.
I dismiss any opinion which goes against the grain,
Of moral impropriety, or could cause another pain.
I cry when I'm supposed to when there's tragedy on TV,
and have prepared what I would say if I had Sartre round to tea.
... dammit. I had to post this when I was unprepared.
Might make it a mission to finish/improve the poem... might not. Whims, you know.
james at the risk of being labled a mysoginist , WHAT EVIDENCE?
80 people interviewed by the police and there conclusion being no evidence of a crime commited.
so whats the evidence for?
that she is a women?
that no women would want to have sex with more than one partner?
80 people interviewed by the police and there conclusion being no evidence of a crime commited.
so whats the evidence for?
that she is a women?
that no women would want to have sex with more than one partner?
Teams don't invite you back to their rooms for gangbangs. I know that from being around the block. There's got to be a past history.
Sure, but she's never had a Porsche guy gangbang. I assume, but I am pretty sure.
I think that's true in the case of a relationship, but not in the case of women who go prowling. That's from being a woman for a long time.
Generally, we paint sexual women as sluts that aren't to be helped. People also want male killers out of jail.
Oh, that isn't true. Look at Casey Anthony. We wanted to believe she murdered her daughter before the body was found.
And that's true and isn't fair, but may be more related to how we encourage boys to be sexually aggressive and how immature these women are.
I hear a lot of that re. hating female pedos.
It was a movie about female empowerment. That's why it was a hit.
Here's the cake from the evidence room:
But, see, this apology cake sent the next day kind of makes me think it wasn't rape:
The cakes are welcome wherever you like, Tiassa. I don't mind if you move them.