Is this really considered rape?

The fact that people can't even ask questions about rape without facing brutal personal attacks is part of the problem.

Recently, Post columnist George F. Will wrote that the sexual assault epidemic on our campuses is being blown out of proportion, arguing that universities have been bogged down with burdensome regulation while nurturing a generation of students who aspire to “victimhood.” Will’s comments are out of touch and don’t comport with the experiences of victims who come forward there are very few of these, universities’ conduct or the very real and severe scope of the problem. so we are constantly told, just dont ask where the victims are

Will’s characterization of victimhood as a “coveted status that confers privileges” demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the repercussions that victims can face in reporting attacks alleged attacks TYVM, and what repercussions? for instance their conscience and their friends saying that the accusation is not justified maybe?. Did he speak to any survivors? If he had, he would have learned that the “privilege” of being a survivor can mean having been assaulted by a classmate you trusted, ostracized for reporting or blamed by friends and family for what happened. So that is a yes then At Amherst College, survivors have been given the preposterous advice to take time off from school until the rapist graduates. Alleged rapist because no court ever pronounced the existence of a rapist, and if the alleged victim is super skeeved that the accused is still on campus this sounds like good advice to me At the University of California at Berkeley, the perks of being a survivor have included having a stay-away order issued by the university lifted and then allowingthe assailant assigned to your dorm.

Will also perpetuated disturbing myths about false reporting and consent. In truth, false reporting rates are extremely low — between 2 percent and 8 percent that is way to broad a range to start claiming that you know the fact, an we have data that indicates that the range runs higher — and obtaining consent from an individual at one point does not give you access to her body in perpetuity we would sure save a lot of trouble if we said that consent runs for 10 minutes, but I shan't hold my breath on that.

From reading Will’s column, you would think that universities are aggressively expelling students found guilty of assault Or that Washington is demanding such,,,Oh wait, they are. But colleges routinely shirk their responsibilities to alleged victims.As of this writing, 60 colleges and universities are under investigation for possible Title IX violations related to sexual violence on campus. Interesting that the mere act of launching an investigation in sexual assaults gets the university listed by the government, in most areas of the law the government has a policy of not even confirming that an investigation is ongoing. But there are benefits of being in league with the government, in this case the feminists beat up universities in the press when no wrong doing has even been alleged.

To refute the statistic that 1 in 5 women is the victim of sexual assault, Will offered “simple arithmetic” to indicate that this number is greatly inflated. He referenced the number of reported sexual assaults at one university — one that is under investigation for Title IX violations — and then suggested that its statistics are the rule go ahead, do his arithmetic on any school. The lack of victims to show when the feminist have advertised that there are NFL stadiums full of victims every year yet again proves to be a nasty problem.

He also relied upon Clery Act statistics, which are notoriously underreported . In some cases, colleges game these statistics by discouraging public reports or debating whether an incident really happened “on campus.” In some instances, the students who come forward to report are not included because they failed an unspoken and unpublished bureaucratic filing test for reporting. And in the worst cases, universities simply lie. Prove it

The silver lining to Will’s misguided op-ed column is that it has provoked a discussion about the uninformed attitudes held by some of our most revered political thinkers. Will seems to believe that efforts to address this issue undermine the prestige of academia. Sadly, too many universities share that attitude and have tried to ignore the problem. Will’s commentary laid bare the backward, “Mad Men” era mentality that survivors must combat every day. Have you ever talked to a 1960's era feminist? Most of them seem to be pretty ******* pissed that what women back then who had to put up with some actual oppression are equated with modern ignorant little bitches who go out and get themselves hammered then go someplace, crawl into bed with a man, and then cry RAPE! when sex happens. This is what they were fighting for, female idiocy? No.

George Will also considers Ronald Reagan to be the greatest president the United States has ever had.

George Will also considers Ronald Reagan to be the greatest president the United States has ever had.

Unless you are a baseball fan, the guy is absolutely worthless as a source of information.

He wanted attention (anyone who looks and dresses as he does needs some) and he got it. That is the end of the story.

Quote:

George Will also considers Ronald Reagan to be the greatest president the United States has ever had.

George Will reminds me of a four-eyed rat scurrying all over the place. He trivializes rape on college campuses. The only thing notable regarding the caustic scrivener is his calling Donald Triumph a 'bloviating ignoramus." That's the only thing I give Wills credit for, recognizing the truth in Trump who was running for the presidency based on the lie Obama was born in Kenya.... Other than that, Wills, in my opinion, is a waste of sheer space and energy.

What about this idea that progressives have become hysterical about claiming that there is a humongous amount of rape happening on university campuses? Is there a chance this is true?

we get told lies all the time, how do we know that this is not another one?

Frank Apisa wrote:

George Will also considers Ronald Reagan to be the greatest president the United States has ever had.

Unless you are a baseball fan, the guy is absolutely worthless as a source of information.

He wanted attention (anyone who looks and dresses as he does needs some) and he got it. That is the end of the story.

and yet he has been able to make a living off of giving opinions, for decades. You like to get your opinions in the papers, has anyone offered to pay you for the work?

Perhaps you'd better stick to breaking down his argument here, rather than dismissing it wholesale.

You dont want to be encouraging us to think that you are green with envy.

This thread is not about George Will. The article I posted has nothing to do with George Will.

I am asking the question about what constitutes a rape and whether the story applies.

I think any rational definition of rape must be gender neutral. This means if the gender roles were reversed, the verdict should be the same.

If a man lies in bed next to a woman and claims to not want sex, but then after some minutes she takes off her clothes and starts sexual activity with him and he doesn't object... would this man be considered a rape victim?

Does anyone want to explain to me why this specific example is an example of rape?

I find it both ridiculous and troubling that this story is being called "rape", putting it at the same level as a violent forced sexual attack.

How is it assault?

Would it still constitute assault if the genders were reversed (the man was lying there and the woman was removing her clothing)?