Hopefully you've all heard the recent controversy over Helen Mirren's comments about . Bearing in mind her controversial reputation does she have a point? Mention and most people react emotionally about a subject that is clearly not black and white, but did she have a point?
My own view is best summed up by a comment make by Anne Widdecombe :scared: ;
Dame Helen is absolutely right. This is sheer common sense prevailing. Of course if a woman goes back to a man's room she has responsibility for her actions. Of course she should accept that she has got herself into that position. What's she asking for? A cup of tea? If we say to women that you can go as far as you like with a man but once you you don't like it then you can go running to the law, well then we are offering them a false comfort. I think Dame Helen is absolutely correct. We can't simply say that women have no responsibility whatsoever: to do that is to treat us like complete idiots.
Bearing in mind the potential emotional heat this topic might generate I would like to hear your opinions, but would also like you all to keep it friendly.
I do agree with what she's saying.. however this shouldn't forfeit the ladies right to change her mind and say no. No should mean no what ever the circumstances are
Wrong. Totally and completely wrong!!!
Going to someone's house, getting into someone's car etc ....... means you are inviting them to you????????NO
No matter what the situation ..... when you say NO it should mean NO!
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I also have strong views on this, and I won't go into too many details but it happened to me. It is a very gray area.. I didn't feel that I could go to the Police as I didn't feel that I would be believed...
Where I live a case has just finished, where the two alleged rapists were found not guilty as the woman had admitted she had been taking drugs and was drunk to the point of being comatose, and was told that she did not have the responsibility to say no, but then also could have said yes.
What happened to me was not my fault, and all I will say is that I was either drugged or they got me drunk.. I couldn't say no.... though I wanted to...
I have also seen the word in the chatrooms and it sickens me.... maybe some people find that sort of thing a turn on.. but to those of us that it has actually happened to.. its not.
This is a very thought provoking thread....
OMG, Miss Widdecombe's comments (in the first quote) beggar belief!!!
By that logic, if a bloke if I meet down the pub, get on with him, pop back to his (or he to mine) for after's as we fancy a jam (theoretical bloke happens to be a musician) - then he holds me down and buggers me.....I am to a certain extent culpable????!!!
Essentially that implies that a woman can't be in the company of a man without having sex on the agenda. The woman should be fired from a cannon back into the dark ages!!
You're doing me wrong ....so wrong.
are we responsible for mugging because we carry our cashmobile phones with us ....absolutely not it is part of normal daily life to do such things and we all have the right to do so with out fear of consequence .
So should it be for a woman to put herself in male company and expect that she will be treated with due respect. The law should support this fundamental right.(thats a full stop for those who don't use punctuation)
No means no.
Regardless of circumstances.
Here's the story if anyones interested
And here's what she said
Dame Helen said that if a woman voluntarily ends up in a man's bedroom, takes all her clothes off and engages in sexual activity in bed with him she has the right to say "no" at the last second.
She added that if the man ignored the woman it was .
But the actress went on: "I don't think she can have that man into court under those circumstances.
No must mean no, its the only way that can distinguish between whats wrong or right and the law must be clear about that.
What is worth considering is the element of people who would cry when its not so. For most people this idea would seem anathema but we all know it can and does happen i'm sure. How do you then limit the damage caused to the recipient of such an allegation?
Just throwing this in to the arena and in no way decrying the severity of the crime of and the effect on the victims.
I don't know what to think about it, but then im a gemini and we dont make decisions well!No means no doesnt it? For example if i am in a swinging club, does that mean any bloke there has the right to shag me? I think not!
I do however think that she shouldn't be villified for speaking out as free speech is one of the wonderful things that our government hasnt taken off us - yet! It is getting ridiculous the way that the press and pc brigade jump on the slightest comment and can make or break a persons career .
There are occasions when a man decides that he may not wish to continue sex with a woman for a variety of reasons. Nerves, feelings of having made a mistake, rushed into it etc. It would be only fair to recognise that he also has the right to bring proceedings to an end.
What is often misunderstood and conveniently overlooked is the 'woman scorned' situation. Where she can make the guys life hell as a result of his change of mind. Either stalking or spreading malicious gossip.
Either male or female can do this to each other, but it's one of those areas of behaviour which people have to suffer in silence. But something which can be extremely unpleasant. Its not in the same category as , but its an unfair sufferance for exercising your right of choice.
Its unfortunate that celebrities say things which can then be misquoted or determined in a controversial way. One has to consider why she wished to say this.
You are right, but for either sex.
I believe that should have a maximum penalty of death or bits being cut of. I know it is extreme for a man to think this. I did say maximum.
I must also point out that exists in the mind of the offender as much as in the act. So in as much as a woman may say come on, then no and come on again she is 'muddying the water'. While poor judgement on the part of the woman does not, in my opinion reduce the man's responsibility, it does demonstrate foolhardiness on the part of the woman.
Just as a football fan going into an opposing team's bar wearing the team shirt,and saying, "We beat you lot of tossers 10-0." does not make the fans who beat him up less responsible, but it is a lack of common sense.
If a single word of that makes sense I am as much surprise as anyone
Travis
I'm sorry but this seems very very simple to me.
A woman should be able to be alone with a man without it being tacite agreement to sex
An old lady should be able to walk down the street late at night without being mugged.
You should be able to leave your front door open without being burgaled.
You should be able to leave a pile of money in your front garden without it being stolen.
Your actions shouldn't lead to you being a victim of crime.
However, common sense has to prevail somewhere at sometime.
I think if sex was approached with complete common sense and responsibility the human race would die out. It wasn't designed to be something that involves high ideals. It simply follows on closely behind, food water and shelter in the order of things. As such its also closely related to agression and mixed passions. In many cases submission and loss of will power.
In comparison the legal process which subsequently goes into action, involves lengthy deliberations, a highly complex process and people using their wits to the very edge of reasoning. A complete contrast to the savage and primitive actions of .
One process is unable to account for the other.
women as 'mere' victims is this just semantics or are you suggesting that it is also wrong to think of men as realrapists....
(yes, yes, I know that men can be 'victims' too)
I want to agree completely with Calistas last paragraph. We all have a choice whether to do something that is right or wrong. No excuses.
:x :x :x :x :x
