Hey, Can A Woman "Ask To Get Raped"?

most of the rape incidents occur because of a miscommunication between the victim and the offender.

BINGO! Which is why both parties should be made to sit in front of a therapist, instead of the guy in front of a Judge on rape charges and the girl at a table with rape feminists who are trying to convince her that she is a victim in need of their "help", a large component of which will be Fireflyish ranting about what bastards men are and how women need to be in constant fear that the love box will be taken by force .... .

Even when the importance of giving and receiving consent is recognized, ambiguities still occur. Some lovers are ambivalent, simultaneously wanting and not wanting sex. Others enjoy being seduced while feigning resistance. Still other prefer NOT to give explicit verbal consent-when, for example, they want their partners to take total control-requiring the participants to interpret nonverbal cues.
.
.
.
There will always be attempts to remove the ambiguities of consent though laws and regulations, some of which are, of course, essential. But in the final analysis only heartfelt respect for ourselves and others can guide us through eros's ambiguities-precisely BECAUSE we recognize their inevitability. Self respect requires that we speak up when sexual advances are unwanted, while vigorously resisting any temptation to perceive ourselves as helpless victims

as we have talked about the level of intoxication required to criminalize sex is moving downwards...but in answer to your question drunk sex has in my experience often been fabulous sex. I object to the state taking away my right to engage in it.

Self respect requires that we speak up when sexual advances are unwanted

Except, you might wind up in jail for doing either of those things.

Three such principles are of utmost importance to every one's erotic well being: (1) respecting self and others, (2) acknowledging rather than denying one's dark side and (3) claiming the responsibilities of freedom.

The bullshit that when a couple are out drinking the male not the female have some special duty to decide if she had too must to drink to invalid her consent is the matter in question.

That "bullshit" is already the law

There is NEVER a time when the victim can or should be blamed for being raped.
To blame the victim is innexcusable.

However, because there are so many false allegations of rape, it does tend to make true rape allegations suspect, in my opinion.
There are cases where the charge of rape has been used as a weapon by a woman to get something she wants.
And while it is true that those women are dealt with by the law, there is something we are all forgetting.

Where does the falsely accused person go to get their good reputations back?
Once a man is accused, thats all anyone remembers, not that the charge was proven false.
So either way, he loses.

Women are free to have sex while intoxicated. And, if they knowingly and willingly consent to such sex, they are highly unlikely to accuse anyone of raping them because the sex was wanted.

Men who have sex with drunken women risk being convicted of rape - even if they appear to have given consent.
Ministers will unveil the controversial proposals this week in a bid to boost conviction rates for sex offences and bring more 'date rapists' to justice.
A new white paper is expected to propose that judges should give firmer guidance to juries in cases where the woman has been drinking.
If a woman is deemed to have consumed so much alcohol that she is incapable of agreeing to make love, the man would be far more likely to be convicted of rape.
The new law would potentially open the way for the prosecution of thousands of men for having sex with drunk women - regardless of whether agreement had been given at the time.
Successful prosecutions for rape often founder before they get to court because of the difficulty in proving to juries that a victim had not given consent.
At the moment, a drunken woman is deemed to be capable of giving consent so long as she is not unconscious.
The law change is expected to lead to a huge rise in the current conviction rate of five per cent.
Proof of whether a woman was drunk would come from medical tests - as well as evidence from witnesses and victims.
The new law places a heavy responsibility on men to be certain that a woman is sober enough to know what she is doing.
The white paper, which has been signed off by ministers, will be published later this week. It follows months of consultation with the Home Office, Ministry of Justice, police and women's support groups.
There were nearly 15,000 allegations of rape in 2005, but only 12 per cent of these went to court and only a handful resulted in convictions.
The proposals will leave far more discretion to judges and juries to determine the amount of alcohol a woman can consume before she is deemed incapable.
The new proposals follow a recent ruling by senior judges that a woman cannot claim rape just because she was drunk.
The Appeal Court raised deep doubts over the Government's latest attempt to improve rate conviction rates.
In March, the Deputy Lord Chief Justice Sir Igor Judge (CORR), and two other senior judges, quashed the conviction of software engineer Benjamin Bree, 25, jailed for five years in December after a drunken evening with a 19-year-old student.
The girl told the jury that she did not want to have sex, but Mr Bree told the court she had given her consent.
Sir Igor said sex amounts to rape if the woman is incapable of giving consent.
But he added: "Where the complainant has voluntarily consumed even substantial quantities of alcohol, but nevertheless remains capable of choosing whether or not to have intercourse, and in drink agrees to do so, this would not be rape."
The judge added that it would not be right to lay down rules ? 'some kind of grid system' ? that say a woman who has reached a set level of drunkenness is incapable of consent.
He said: "Experience shows that different individuals have a greater or lesser capacity to cope with alcohol."
Earlier this year the Council of Circuit Judges said it should be left to juries to decide whether a woman is capable of consenting to sex.
A study by the Association of Chief Police Officers has found that a 'significant' number of rape and sexual assault victims had drunk at least the equivalent of eight pub glasses of wine. This is equivalent to two and a half times the drink driving limit.
Opponents of the proposals fear they may encourage some women to allege rape when they regret having had sex while drunk.
George McAuley, chairman of the UK Men's Movement, said men may have to resort to obtaining written 'contracts' or using mobile phones to film their partners consenting to sex.
He said: "It means men will have to get a consent form signed, dated and countersigned in triplicate before they make love. This legislation is deliberately designed to put more men behind bars."


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462614/Sex-woman-drunk-soon-rape.html#ixzz15Ihp30Rs

The average woman fantasizes about being ravished by a faceless stranger

Quote:

I also know of a young 11 yr old girl who suicided because BOTH foster parents were sexually molesting her.

Speechless (as in - this leaves me speechless with sorrow for that girl)

I can't speak for anyone but myself and I've never fantasized about being raped by a stranger with any sense of anticipation or pleasure at the thought. I can't say that I've discussed it with most of the women I know, so I have no data on which to base an opinion as to how common it is.

The law is not going to change to accommodate your particular atypical sexual appetites

What's with you and the "rape feminist agenda"? Why can't you acknowledge that most women and most men are not objecting to the current rape laws