DATE RAPE! DID YOU SEE WHAT I SAW?

CookingWithCarlo.com ^ | Oct 16 2003 | Carlo3b Dad, Chef, Author

[carlo3b]

All I think anyone wants is a far trial.. no leg up, no assumptions, generalizations, or any predetermined bias. We have been sliding down a slippery slope for far too long. Men are not always wrong, just as women haven't been abused far too often.

I don't know if Kobe, a rich dumb jock, did it because I haven't a clue, but this nonsense that we can't cast dispersions on his accuser because women who claim victim hood in sex aren't to be doubted. That is as criminal as it is absurd.

[carlo3b]

 You can flame me all you want, but it's about time for both men and women to take some responsibility.

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY???
GASP!
HOW DARE YOU?

[justshutupandtakeit]

Is it not a "fact" that Nietzche loved to outrage? Is it also not a "fact" that if someone blows my head off, I am then dead?

[Saundra Duffy]

I especially want to be pinged on the diet stuff - not that I have a fat butt or anything.

[carlo3b]

not that I have a fat butt or anything.

Who said that? I didn't say that... butt .. LOLOLOLOL You are on my list of women to watch!..I'll ping ya some time. *<]:)

[Alamo-Girl]

I'm one of those who believes the jury ought to have access to whatever they wish to know. The fact that judges via motions in limini (sp?) and legislators by act can limit evidence is troubling to me --- whether a criminal or civil trial. Even in a simple business law case, a judge can utterly destroy either side by his pre-trial rulings.

[carlo3b]

whether a criminal or civil trial. Even in a simple business law case, a judge can utterly destroy either side by his pre-trial rulings.

Therein is the problem, we have wandered astray far way from the actual law and have now found ourselves deciding what was the intent, or the hidden meanings behind the laws.. BS. It depends too much on self-imposed filters, and strangled interpretations.

[OldFriend]

Colorado law demands that permission be granted by the judge before the claims are made public. Kobe's attorney failed to do that and just went ahead with her outrageous charges.

[OldFriend]

Yup, she asked for it. Went into the room with a man......got what she deserved. How dare she.......and those provocative yellow panties....worse than Monica's thong.

[aruanan]

Is it not a "fact" that Nietzche loved to outrage? Is it also not a "fact" that if someone blows my head off, I am then dead?

So it would appear. The point of "there are no facts, only interpretations" is that too many people too blithely believe that their characterization of their own percepts is the same thing as an independently existing reality. They're not. They may be close; they may be close most of the time; they may be sufficiently close most of the time, but they're not the same. Something like this can be seen in a poster on a Cubs game thread who said, "Baseball is boring" as though the predicate were an intrinsic property of the subject rather than an unwitting description of his own reaction to the subject.

He's a lot more right than you think. You can posit that a certain relationship or characteristic exists on its own apart from anyone's perception and call it a "fact." You can further posit that if it is perceived by different people with similar abilities under similar circumstances they'll all come up with a similar description and call that similar description a "fact." However, as soon as someone has taken his percept and compared and contrasted it with his previous experiences in the context of his intellectual abilities and formulated a description of what he experienced, he has produced an interpretation of his percept. If there are enough similar descriptions under similar circumstances, people say that a "fact" has been established. This, of course, may or may not be true, but whatever the case, the consistency lies in their interpretation of what they believe they experienced.

[Tax-chick]

But the concept that all you have to do is say NO at the last moment and all is well is insane. That's like standing in front of a freight train, whispering "Stop."

Well said. Or a pedestrian expecting that right-of-way rules will protect him from a truck. It seems, unfortunately, that because a woman has "a right to say no" at any point in a sexual encouter, that some girls believe this will actually ensure their safety. Philosophy is full of rights that can be mighty difficult to enforce.

I take no position on whether this young woman was raped; there's simply too much conflicting "evidence" being offered. However, she's unquestionably an object lesson for other women who'd like to avoid rape. My lecture would start "Don't do a single thing that Miss X did."

[carlo3b]

YEAH.. what you said!.. :)

[freedox]

Sex is an act that involves two people......I have to ask myself why the law only affords legal recourse to one of them if the act is not performed to her liking. In the interest of "sexual equality," I've come up with an option. Maybe men should be given equal time by allowing them to bring charges against female sexual partners for "being a bad lay." That way, the playing field would be leveled and both participants could enter into the act with the fear of legal charges hanging over their heads......wouldn't that make sex fun???

[Alamo-Girl]

That is particularly sad with regard to the tortured interpretation of the Constitution.

[Queen Jadis]

what a great post!

[carlo3b]

Sex is an act that involves two people..

What? What happened to the other 7?.. Sheeeesh ..Youth.. :@)

[christie]

Yup, she asked for it. Went into the room with a man......got what she deserved. How dare she.......and those provocative yellow panties....worse than Monica's thong.

I don't think I ever said she got what she deserved. That is the argument to stop the discussion that there are consequences to conduct.

No woman (or child or boy for that matter) deserves to be raped. It's a horrible crime. And a crime it is. And it should be severely punished.

But in a generic sense, I wish we would find some common sense and dignity in our behavior. Being taught that you can just say no is crazy. Yes, women have the right to say no, but changing her mind midstream and then charging rape is not right.

When it becomes a he said, she said situation, the defendant should have every right to defend himself.

[christie]

Thanks.

[mamaduck]

Great essay, carlo!

(cough)

Collaborate: to work jointly with others
Corroborate: to support with evidence

:-p

[Buggman]

Good piece. Pinging for a later read.