Patrick Kane: [Updated] D.A. Decides Not to Prosecute; NHL Determines Claims "Unfounded"

[Hoss]

Of course if somebody says 'no', then it needs to stop. But this isn't about saying 'no', it's about NOT saying 'no' and then claiming sexual abuse.

This specific scenario, then, isn't something that me, or probably anybody else here, has a clear answer for.

 

Imagining it myself it seems like there would obviously be a point where the woman just goes silent. If she's still kissing and engaging in the contact, as well, after leading to the bedroom and removing clothing then it wasn't sexual assault.

 

Now if you're getting ready to have sex with somebody and suddenly they become silent and are no longer engaging then you stop. Who wants to have sex with somebody who is laying their essentially motionless and silent? Re-introduce conversation into the situation. Ask if they are okay if they have gone silent and motionless.

[K-9]

And 1 even more intriguing item, how does the act become "non-consentual" AFTER it was censentually enacted? At 1st reading, it comes across as telling someone that was driving 55 in a 55 that they're getting a ticket for speeding because that stretch of road will be rezoned to 35 on Tuesday.

I was referring to subsequent acts. It has to be consensual every time. Sorry I wasn't clear on that.

[JJFIVEOH]

... You can definitely have sex with almost all your clothes on, especially if you are a woman in a dress.

 

Do I really need to get specific by mentioning underwear? Is leaving your T-shirt on while having sex really going to alter my point?

[...]

Do I really need to get specific by mentioning underwear? Is leaving your T-shirt on while having sex really going to alter my point?

 

You will not win the point. You're not allowed to.

[JJFIVEOH]

This specific scenario, then, isn't something that me, or probably anybody else here, has a clear answer for.

 

Imagining it myself it seems like there would obviously be a point where the woman just goes silent. If she's still kissing and engaging in the contact, as well, after leading to the bedroom and removing clothing then it wasn't sexual assault.

 

Now if you're getting ready to have sex with somebody and suddenly they become silent and are no longer engaging then you stop. Who wants to have sex with somebody who is laying their essentially motionless and silent? Re-introduce conversation into the situation. Ask if they are okay if they have gone silent and motionless.

 

This is getting ridiculous. I'm not going to get into x-rated examples of how your scenario is absurd. Nor am I going to get almost as far as having a lawyer in the room to fill out paperwork before I go through the deed.

 

Something needs to be done about sexual abuse. And so does this rampant progressivism. A line needs to be drawn, it seems some people's idea of fixing the situation is by leaping over that line in a full sprint to the end of the spectrum.

 

I'm reminded of the scene in Demolition Man. Oh how that movie gets more and more accurate by the day.

[3putt]

I've not weighed in here, much. The debate has been thorough. I struggle with the concept of regret, or withdrawn consent. I struggle with that as a general matter, and not as one simply in this heinous context. I just don't know what it means.

Legally, regret is just that.  Prior to engaging in the act and during its consummation consent can be withdrawn.  After consummation "regretting" the act does not remove the consent at the time it occurred.

Edited August 20, 2015 by 3putt

[K-9]

This thread has taken a turn towards the bizarre. I will bow out with simply,

 

What spndnchz said.

 

Nothing hypothetical about that.

[LGR4GM]

Do I really need to get specific by mentioning underwear? Is leaving your T-shirt on while having sex really going to alter my point?

You specified a scenario and then followed it up with the clothes on. I am merely adding a scenario where a woman can have clothes on and be assaulted

That says 37.4% of female rape victims were first raped between the ages of 18-24.  

 

Then the second stat says 19% of undergraduate women (in "a study" unspecified) experienced attempted or completed sexual assault since entering college.

 

EDIT: The study is specified in the report "Krebs CP, Linquist CH, Warner TD, Fisher BS, Martin SL. College women’s experiences with physically forced, alcohol- or other drug-enabled, and drug-facilitated sexual assault before and since entering college. Journal of American College Health 2009; 57(6):639-647."

 

I looked through it a bit.  The sample of women they got were from "2 large 4-year universities" ~45% of applicable women from those schools participated in the survey.  So there's the sample size.

 

Here is the department of justice stuff http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

 

I might have been a little high but I am not sure if those stats are including or excluding a couple of things but there we go.

Edited August 20, 2015 by LGR4GM

[JJFIVEOH]

You will not win the point. You're not allowed to.

 

It's OK, I came into this thread with the impression that my point would get some pushack.

[JJFIVEOH]

Legally, regret is just that.  Prior to engaging in the act and during its consummation consent can be withdrawn.  After consummation "regretting" the act does not remove the consent at the time it occurred.

 

Thank you.

[LGR4GM]

I guess I just don't believe there is a large group of women having sex with guys and then feeling guilty about it (which is another society issue all together) and then falsely claiming rape. 80% of sexual assault victims in college don't even report it to the police.

Edited August 20, 2015 by LGR4GM

[That Aud Smell]

Two Chicago Tribune writers have the byline today on a comprehensive overview of where the Kane investigation stands, and where it may be headed.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-patrick-kane-prosecutor-20150819-story.html

[Taro T]

I was referring to subsequent acts. It has to be consensual every time. Sorry I wasn't clear on that.

Ok. That makes more sense and I'd agree w/ that.

[qwksndmonster]

Here is the department of justice stuff http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

 

I might have been a little high but I am not sure if those stats are including or excluding a couple of things but there we go.

Your original stat was "1 out of 4 women between the age of 18-24 will be sexually assaulted," but from the information you provided, the stat should have been "1 out of 5 undergraduate females experiences attempted or completed sexual assault since entering college."

[LGR4GM]

Your original stat was "1 out of 4 women between the age of 18-24 will be sexually assaulted," but from the information you provided, the stat should have been "1 out of 5 undergraduate females experiences attempted or completed sexual assault since entering college."

And I admitted I was wrong. 

[Taro T]

That says 37.4% of female rape victims were first raped between the ages of 18-24.  

 

Then the second stat says 19% of undergraduate women (in "a study" unspecified) experienced attempted or completed sexual assault since entering college.

 

EDIT: The study is specified in the report "Krebs CP, Linquist CH, Warner TD, Fisher BS, Martin SL. College women’s experiences with physically forced, alcohol- or other drug-enabled, and drug-facilitated sexual assault before and since entering college. Journal of American College Health 2009; 57(6):639-647."

 

I looked through it a bit.  The sample of women they got were from "2 large 4-year universities" ~45% of applicable women from those schools participated in the survey.  So there's the sample size.

Seeing as how you looked up the study Liger's "1 in 4" (uh, last I checked 19.x% is 1 in 5, but whatever) was based on; how were they defining "sexual assault" & "attempted sexual assault?"

[qwksndmonster]

And I admitted I was wrong. 

You said "I might have been a little high."  I don't care when you're doing your drugs.

 

1/5 of undergrad females having experienced attempted or completed sexual assault is significantly different from 1/4 if women having been assaulted. Mainly because there's no shorthand for what an attempted sexual assault is.  That makes the stat next to useless when considering what overall percentage of women might have been assaulted.

[Neo]

Legally, regret is just that.  Prior to engaging in the act and during its consummation consent can be withdrawn.  After consummation "regretting" the act does not remove the consent at the time it occurred.

Thanks for responding. Did I miss that point of agreement from posters and their sources?

[qwksndmonster]

Seeing as how you looked up the study Liger's "1 in 4" (uh, last I checked 19.x% is 1 in 5, but whatever) was based on; how were they defining "sexual assault" & "attempted sexual assault?"

Best I could find for an explanation is that they asked them this question: 

 

Has anyone attempted but not succeeded in having sexual contact with you by using or threatening to use physical force against you?

 

Here's the link: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3200/JACH.57.6.639-649

 

EDIT: This is how they define sexual contact:

 

 

These questions ask about 5 types of unwanted sexual contact:

• Forced touching of a sexual nature (forced kissing, touching of private parts, grabbing, fondling, rubbing up against you in a sexual way, even if it is over your clothes)

• Oral sex (someone’s mouth or tongue making contact with your genitals or your mouth or tongue making contact with someone else’s genitals)

• Sexual intercourse (someone’s penis being put in your ######)

• ###### sex (someone’s penis being put in your ######)

• Sexual penetration with a finger or object (someone putting their finger or an object like a bottle or a candle in your ###### or ######)

 

Edited August 20, 2015 by immerman

[LGR4GM]

Best I could find for an explanation is that they asked them this question: 

 

Has anyone attempted but not succeeded in having sexual contact with you by using or threatening to use physical force against you?

 

Here's the link: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3200/JACH.57.6.639-649

And you are satisfied or unsatisfied with that method of survey?

[That Aud Smell]

Two Chicago Tribune writers have the byline today on a comprehensive overview of where the Kane investigation stands, and where it may be headed.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-patrick-kane-prosecutor-20150819-story.html

[JJFIVEOH]

So 1 in 5 report sexual abuse and 80% of cases aren't reported?

[...]

This is getting ridiculous. I'm not going to get into x-rated examples of how your scenario is absurd. Nor am I going to get almost as far as having a lawyer in the room to fill out paperwork before I go through the deed.

 

Something needs to be done about sexual abuse. And so does this rampant progressivism. A line needs to be drawn, it seems some people's idea of fixing the situation is by leaping over that line in a full sprint to the end of the spectrum.

 

I'm reminded of the scene in Demolition Man. Oh how that movie gets more and more accurate by the day.

It's the same mindset that occupies politics. There's a certain utopianism that pervades the arguments made by a certain side, that ignores history and human nature. Really, you want to get out a check-list, pre-approved by a feminist lawyer, before you start touching genitalia? How about, both parties need to be into it, and if one party ain't, then they should simply SAY SO.

 

The same people arguing the feminist line have no problem with the movies coming out of Hollywood, the lead fashion stories on Yahoo, the ads shown during prime-time TV. Where does the social influence come from? Not the catholics. Not the synagogues. Oh, but look, Mad Men featured a sizzling scene this week. That's okay, right?

 

So, the social influences really are ignored, but the individual is supposed to have the brain power, self control, and prescience to be in complete control at all times. Where does this develop, who is responsible to aid in this development. The schools and the parents. Yes? Well, the schools aren't allowed to teach self-control...really...or they get sued. Used to be able to. In fact, the schools, what they do teach, goes beyond the basics to the point of ridiculousness...no wonder the kids don't take it seriously.

 

That leaves the parents. Parents, assuming we're talking about a mother-father pair, who both have to work a job, leaving their kids to after-school or day care, or leaving the kids on their own. When they do get the kids, they still have to make dinner, do the housework, go over homework, whatever. Oh yeah, maybe they have that conversation over dinner. Gee, I wonder how many families eat dinner at the table together every night? Single parent homes - sure sex education is a priority. You should blame the parents...or not. The family unit has been under assault since the 1960's...how's that working out for America? Aww, too old fashioned, I suppose, wanting a solid family-unit and all.

 

Josie said it earlier - her upbringing made her feel like a slut if she were all into sex. Okay, good. Of course that skews her perception, but at least it helps her stay safe. Maybe the rest of America's girls ought to be raised the way Josie was. And be raised to say "no" and that it's okay to say "no".

 

Guys need to be raised to respect women. When did this stop happening, by the way? Because, it used to be that way. At what point in America's history did women become disrespected to the point where every female ought to consider themselves a potential rape victim?

 

And no one here has really solved the "what is rape" question. Is it by force? Is it no consent? If consent is the issue, does the consent need to be verbalized? You do dig that when one party says "no" and tries to stop the sex, then it becomes "by force" if the other party continues on, right?

 

Finally, every time I open this thread two thoughts eventually pass through my mind, and I will share what they are, and leave them here. Actually three:

 

Catholic Girls by Frank Zappa

Fast Times at Ridgemont High

 

And the third thought is all of the chicks, when I was young and single, who took my clothes off and were grabbing me without my invite. I didn't mind, and I didn't think anything negative about them (on the contrary). Was I a bad boy? Were they bad girls?

[drnkirishone]

You answered your own question. The advancement stops when she decides she doesn't want to have sex.

 

Period.

 

Doesn't matter how far along in the act they were. Once it is not consensual, it is game over. That could be before, during, or after intercourse, by the way.

 

That should be obvious to a gentleman with an ounce of moral fiber that doesn't let his d ick do his thinking for him.

you cant revoke consent afterwards. There is not a 90 day return policy on sex

[qwksndmonster]

And you are satisfied or unsatisfied with that method of survey?

You said 1/4 of women ages 18-24 were assaulted.  When 1/5 of women in college had experienced attempted or completed sexual assault.

 

Please own up to how you completely fabricated a statistic.  The study is fine, because they explain where that number came from.

Edited August 20, 2015 by immerman