The whole thing is messy and awful, for sure. But when the crucial element of the crime is in the mind (intent) as opposed to in the rest of the evidence (because sex is often alleged to have been consensual), I don't know how any allegation could be said to be true or false. In fact, I suspect in some cases both parties are being perfectly honest -- one party wanted sex, one party didn't, and with a culture that has eroticized the overcoming of protests, man, you have a potent situation for misunderstanding and grief.

Because of those issues, I do think we have to continue to step up the efforts to creat clear communication around sexual activity. No has to mean no, even if you think it means yes, and even if she thinks no means yes. Eventually, maybe, we can get to a place where everyone is clear about their expectations. That won't resolve matters involving genuine liars, of course, but it would imrpove the climate, no?

Hi Rundeep,

(Good to see you). Well, yes, that all makes sense. I would suggest a few other measures. A poster below recommends not disclosing the identity of the accused much the way we protect the identity of rape victims, which seems a logical step to take until at least conviction.

I’ve often thought a weird congruency between positions on this issue and the dealt penalty—if you believe the benefit of the doubt mot always fall to the alleged victim than you are likely to be both pro-death penalty and more inclined to believe false allegations a lesser concern (compared to the number of actual rapes) than the crime itself. Similarly, if you are firmly committed to the concept of innocent until proven guilty you are likely to be against the death penalty and to treat the false allegations as a far more important issue because of their violation of that principle (the accused is immediately tarnished regardless of verdict), the disproportionate impact of false allegations and the consequences to the accused and the abuse of the courts and remedy of law as a bludgeon.

Ancient Roman courts used to provide that if a plaintiff sued for a claim later proved to be untrue the plaintiff would be liable for the same penalty that would have been extracted from the falsely accused. There’s an idea.

Perhaps a special penalty for such misuse of the process where allegations are provably and demonstrably false (subject to the highest standard of proof) carrying a far steeper penalty than filing a false statement/false accusation or perjury? Rape certainly carries a higher penalty and the commensurate damage done to the falsely accused hardly seems amenable to civil remedy.

I’m open to ideas. (I find the author’s conclusion) “This is a problem that a men's rights movement shouldn't trump up. And also one that feminists can't dismiss.” To be deeply dissatisfying and the equivalent of throwing our hands up and saying “Oh well, thems da breaks!”

A very good point is your phrase "a culture that has eroticized the overcoming of protests." How often does this kind of 'futile resistance melting into surrender' stuff occur in fiction? Especially women's fiction? Maybe not quite as much as it was, but it's still pretty common from the few romance novels I've leafed through.

When you have women indulging in scantily-disguised rape fantasies, and 'good girls' expected to put up resistance before going 'all the way,' how tough is it to decide when rape has even taken place?

Agree with your final paragraph. We do need to be more straightforward about sex, as tempting as it is to drape it all in a chiffon of fantasy and denials.

(and please don’t leave)~! A thoughtful response to a good poster. You made my day. I gotta get out of BoTF more often. Funny… Jurisprudence is where I started. Maybe it’s time to limit my interactions to here.

Anyway, Cheers, and thanks for a though provoking reply.

Well, thanks, I try to be thoughtful, though some people accuse me of being a bit of a hothead...:)

I'll try to drop in anytime I see a provocative article on here. I agree that there's little enough rational discussion on these boards.

Thanks again!

Umm, I can't believe you just said that.

If one person wanted sex, and the other didn't, and so indicated, or was even just unconscious, that's rape.

What planet are you people living on?

I forgot to add though, that "you can't handle the truth" is one of my favorite lines too.

And do men really have that much trouble figuring out how to read women? Honestly??

Try asking! Or stop what you're doing, and see if she asks you to continue.

Cheese and crackers.

that it's often not clear what has been indicated. We've been trained to think a no response, unless delivered with a blow to the head, may not really mean no. Add drugs/alcohol and generally impaired judgment (hello teenagers) and I think it might be more difficult then you think. We all know what's in our own heads. Learning to respect what may be in someone else's is the whole point of growing up.