High profiles murders in the U.S: what is going on?

Shonx

Shallow House
Yes, because men can only rape women if they're drunk. There's no possible way they can do it otherwise.

And drunk women are always so out of their minds that they go home with anyone. Please.

Well, she's 5' high and doesn't drink that often, was out with her girlfriends who kept chucking drinks down her neck and then started getting off with some turntablist dude that happened to be a friend of her girlfriends, who it turns out make a habit of picking up the youngest looking drunk girls he can find in the club. She ended up going back to his and couldn't remember agreeing to anything - whatever you think of blokes, I do think that there's a certain rule that you don't have sex with someone that's barely conscious. Her girlfriends that knew the guy still put it down to her not remembering saying yes, because he's like a bit famous and he's mates with another of their male friends.

I've been drunk, on acid, injecting speedballs all at once and I still never thought "hey I think it'd be a good idea to go home alone with a total stranger." If I had decided to go home with someone, it would probably be because they seemed nice and harmless, regardless of whether I was intoxicated. Predators are good at this. Seeming nice. Or taking advantage of situations where a person can't move, or whatnot. Women shouldn't have to live in fear, cowering at home just in case a big bad rapist might be out; men who commit these crimes should be prosecuted with SEVERE penalties.

They have to do the crime before they get caught though, by which time the damage has been done. I'm not saying live in fear, but given the alternative surely it's wise to not get so fucked you can't help yourself.

Most women are raped by people they know. Often people they know well. Men raped women just as often before women were allowed to drink if they wanted to.

It's an easier target. Believe it or not, I don't want to see women raped either
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Listen, because you're a man I think you're seeing this from a male perspective. For some reason the media pounds it into men's heads that women are more likely to have sex with you if they're very drunk. It doesn't matter how much alcohol you have in you, you're not going to do something that you would *never* do sober. That's a shitty excuse. It's like when people say "I only cheated on so-and-so because I was drunk." No, you always wanted to cheat, but the alcohol made it easier for you to let your inhibitions down and go through with it. Plus, you thought you had an excuse. Your friend is likely someone who goes home with people she picks up at bars, drunk or not. A lot of people do this. Nothing wrong with that, but there are bad people out there, so you're potentially endangering yourself. Life's like that--nothing ventured, nothing gained.

The unfortunate truth of the matter is that a 5 foot tall woman could have just as easily been raped by a man if she'd been stone cold sober and gone home with him. Being alone anywhere with men you don't feel completely comfortable with (or sadly even one you trust) can get you raped, but I don't see anyone telling women not to make friends or go to work in an office with only men or go to the library at night or whatever. The point is, women shouldn't have to alter their lives because predators exist. That's like passing the patriot act because Al Qaida exists. It doesn't work.

A person who is "blacked out" on substances, or is legally intoxicated, is not considered legally capable of giving consent in the U.S. now, thankfully. This isn't entirely unproblematic, but I do think it's important to send a strong message that coercing someone who is unconscious to have sex is tantamount to rape.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
I don't watch TV any more due to it's innate shitness. Was thinking the show that probably had most of that sort of humour that I last saw was Two and a Half Men, but the humour seemed to be based more on how shallow and pathetic the Charlie Sheen character was rather than a "wow, isn't it empowering" vibe.

Of course it's not empowering for men to talk about sex, because they've always had the privilege of being entitled to have sex whenever and however they like. It's empowering to see women openly talking about their sex life/preferences/experiences/etc because historically women have been unable to do so. It is important that women are afforded the same privilege to enjoy sex that men are. Yes. It is. And to talk about it if they feel like it.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Jeffrey Dahmer picked up his male victims at bars, many times faking "I need help changing a tire" type scenarios, but I don't see anyone biting their nails worried about men drinking too much.

The double standard is alive and well.
 

Shonx

Shallow House
Jeffrey Dahmer picked up his male victims at bars, many times faking "I need help changing a tire" type scenarios, but I don't see anyone biting their nails worried about men drinking too much.

The double standard is alive and well.

And the likely ratio of men to women being picked up and sexually assaulted is?
 

Shonx

Shallow House
Your friend is likely someone who goes home with people she picks up at bars, drunk or not. A lot of people do this. Nothing wrong with that, but there are bad people out there, so you're potentially endangering yourself. Life's like that--nothing ventured, nothing gained.

She hadn't had sex for 3 years prior to that.

The unfortunate truth of the matter is that a 5 foot tall woman could have just as easily been raped by a man if she'd been stone cold sober and gone home with him.

You're really missing the point here - if she was sober, she wouldn't have gone with him - HER JUDGEMENT WAS IMPAIRED. In much the same way that I probably wouldn't have helpfully tried to fix my mate's neckache by trying to twist his head off, or probably wouldn't have walked out in front of that car and ended up in hospital if I'd bothered looking, or thought that guy would just walk away and not headbutt me if I told him to go fuck himself, all due to drinking rather too much. Do you see the connection?

A person who is "blacked out" on substances, or is legally intoxicated, is not considered legally capable of giving consent in the U.S. now, thankfully. This isn't entirely unproblematic, but I do think it's important to send a strong message that coercing someone who is unconscious to have sex is tantamount to rape.

Agreement at last. :D
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
If the woman let's them or they go to hookers. Or if they're rapists.

Yup.

After the man finds a woman who will have sex with him (or after he forces her to have sex with him), he's a "stud" and she's a "whore."

According to biologists, among humans it's females who are the sexual "selectors", who get to sit back and wait for a suitable mate, then choose who the best option is-- yet it's men who get credit for some sort of "conquest" if they have sex with someone. Lol.
 

Shonx

Shallow House
Yup.

After the man finds a woman who will have sex with him (or after he forces her to have sex with him), he's a "stud" and she's a "whore."

According to biologists, among humans it's females who are the sexual "selectors", who get to sit back and wait for a suitable mate, then choose who the best option is-- yet it's men who get credit for some sort of "conquest" if they have sex with someone. Lol.

You are familiar with the term "got lucky" I take it. I think it's a far closer description than "conquest" for most men. Women had the power all the time on that front. :)

Do you live in the 1970's by the way, unless it's pisstakey gangsta shit, I haven't heard anyone talk that rude about women past the age of 15 in a long time.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
You're really missing the point here - if she was sober, she wouldn't have gone with him - HER JUDGEMENT WAS IMPAIRED. In much the same way that I probably wouldn't have helpfully tried to fix my mate's neckache by trying to twist his head off, or probably wouldn't have walked out in front of that car and ended up in hospital if I'd bothered looking, or thought that guy would just walk away and not headbutt me if I told him to go fuck himself, all due to drinking rather too much. Do you see the connection?

Nope. The sort of judgment that gets impaired by alcohol is usually the type that keeps people from trying to perform physical feats (like jumping from a 15 foot roof) that they wouldn't otherwise do, or drive when their coordination is bad. I just don't buy that excuse. I think she's embarrassed because she blames herself (which is just ridiculous--he had no right, no matter how drunk she was), so she's trying to make excuses. She thinks she should've known he was going to do that.

I did drugs everyday for 10 years, and I never accidentally slipped up and thought "I'll just go home with this random dude all alone." I've gone around to strange parties in groups.

But I suppose in NY people are rightfully wary of everyone.

P.S. I'm a full advocate of the "fuck the stupid rapist, he's not going to ruin my life" school of thought that would contend that your friend is and will be just fine. She shouldn't continue victimizing herself by thinking it was a big deal unless she's going to empower herself and get the rape kit done and press charges. If I were her I'd get tested for STDs immediately (as soon as they're detectable.) Either it was a crime and he deserves prosecution and punishment, or she can resign herself to the fact that an evil person tried to terrorize her and she can't let his tactic work. This requires the help of a psychotherapist or other professional.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
You are familiar with the term "got lucky" I take it. I think it's a far closer description than "conquest" for most men. Women had the power all the time on that front. :)

Do you live in the 1970's by the way, unless it's pisstakey gangsta shit, I haven't heard anyone talk that rude about women past the age of 15 in a long time.

Where do you live, in a cave?

Even if it's not spoken outright, it's implied, which is just as ridiculous.

The male reaction to Sex and the City I've seen makes me ill. I don't even like that show much, but jesus.

The new male persecution complex, oy.
 

Shonx

Shallow House
Nope. The sort of judgment that gets impaired by alcohol is usually the type that keeps people from trying to perform physical feats (like jumping from a 15 foot roof) that they wouldn't otherwise do, or drive when their coordination is bad. I just don't buy that excuse. I think she's embarrassed because she blames herself (which is just ridiculous--he had no right, no matter how drunk she was), so she's trying to make excuses. She thinks she should've known he was going to do that.

I did drugs everyday for 10 years, and I never accidentally slipped up and thought "I'll just go home with this random dude all alone." I've gone around to strange parties in groups.

But I suppose in NY people are rightfully wary of everyone.

A lot of people I know have had sex with people that they probably wouldn't have if they weren't drunk and horny, and none of that involved rape, just bad decisions. Quite a few have reported situations where they ended up somewhere for a few drinks and then found themselves in an intimidating situation. A few have been attacked. Your experience isn't everyone else's experience, maybe you're just naturally more cautious or you've just been smarter or luckier.
 

Shonx

Shallow House
Where do you live, in a cave?

Even if it's not spoken outright, it's implied, which is just as ridiculous.

The male reaction to Sex and the City I've seen makes me ill. I don't even like that show much, but jesus.

The new male persecution complex, oy.

So much nicer than the female persecution complex eh. Or is that just an excuse for your misandry of the last few pages. You blame men for not contributing to child care and then write them off as sperm donors. Heterosexual males only discuss gender roles apparently (which obviously you wouldn't participate in) and their sexuality is boring (so presumably you don't have sex with them). You say rape is disgusting but don't seem to recognize risk reduction to be a good thing because I'm looking at it from the "man's perspective" and it would have happened anyway (even though from the story it clearly wouldn't).

You start this thread on serial killers and sexual sadism and then just descend into insults at implied sexism which even in the instances it does exist are not something I perpetuate or can do a great deal about. If the points you state were reversed (women are just cum buckets, who gives a fuck about women's sexuality) that would be misogynist wouldn't it? So basically it's ok for you to be openly dismissive of men yet be offended by implied sexism? So no double-standard there then.

I think most of the reason people (i.e. not just men) hate SATC is the fact that it exemplifies superficial, self-obsessed, cliquey, consumerist, upper-class culture and seems to have mostly made its mark through the fairly obvious concept that women enjoy sex too (really!! no way!!). Can you not see how people might dislike both Sex and the City AND Entourage? Can you see how it might be the characters that people find objectionable? They're about as likeable as most of BEE's NY creations.
 

jambo

slip inside my schlafsack
A female alcoholic of 10 years could easily out drink your average 18-year-old male. In fact, she could probably drink an amount of liquor that would kill the average person.
Yowsers, they breed 'em young these days! I don't think 18 year old males should be engaging 10 year olds of any gender in drinking contests though really.

:p
 

jambo

slip inside my schlafsack
I heard they get started on the booze to get through the Temazepam comedowns.
 

waffle

Banned
I think most of the reason people (i.e. not just men) hate SATC is the fact that it exemplifies superficial, self-obsessed, cliquey, consumerist, upper-class culture and seems to have mostly made its mark through the fairly obvious concept that women enjoy sex too (really!! no way!!). Can you not see how people might dislike both Sex and the City AND Entourage? Can you see how it might be the characters that people find objectionable? They're about as likeable as most of BEE's NY creations.

If those were the reasons for dismissing it, then we would have to dismiss virtually all TV series and films. Most of the criticisms of the series (as with other series like it, such as Desperate Housewives) were also based on a misreading: that they 'masculinize' women, that they portray women as female 'studs' immorally and gratuitously hunting down men for a transient 'score', etc, then reporting back to the 'gal den' for a post-mortem analysis and point-scoring boast-fest.

On the contrary, if we strip away the cosmopolitan urban-sophisticate chic ironic posing, what remains is a group of ultra-conservative stereotypes straight out of maudlin Mills & Boon romantic fiction, relentlessly obsessing over finding The Right Man, the One. The whole series is fundamentally anti-feminist, thoroughly phallocentric, with all the heroines forever in a state of lack without their Man. It's 'postmodern' twist is that the series renders this search for The One equivalent to the consumerist condition itself: a fear of all or any commitment, a continuous procrastination, an imprisonment in the anxiety of equivocation ("Will I buy this one or that one or ... so many to choose from and their all cute and I don't want to miss out on any and I'd have to stop shopping and I couldn't compare notes anymore with the gals") and postponement of choice, while still all predicated around subordination to phallic coupledom.

No chance of them becoming serial killers. Yet.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
If those were the reasons for dismissing it, then we would have to dismiss virtually all TV series and films. Most of the criticisms of the series (as with other series like it, such as Desperate Housewives) were also based on a misreading: that they 'masculinize' women, that they portray women as female 'studs' immorally and gratuitously hunting down men for a transient 'score', etc, then reporting back to the 'gal den' for a post-mortem analysis and point-scoring boast-fest.

On the contrary, if we strip away the cosmopolitan urban-sophisticate chic ironic posing, what remains is a group of ultra-conservative stereotypes straight out of maudlin Mills & Boon romantic fiction, relentlessly obsessing over finding The Right Man, the One. The whole series is fundamentally anti-feminist, thoroughly phallocentric, with all the heroines forever in a state of lack without their Man. It's 'postmodern' twist is that the series renders this search for The One equivalent to the consumerist condition itself: a fear of all or any commitment, a continuous procrastination, an imprisonment in the anxiety of equivocation ("Will I buy this one or that one or ... so many to choose from and their all cute and I don't want to miss out on any and I'd have to stop shopping and I couldn't compare notes anymore with the gals") and postponement of choice, while still all predicated around subordination to phallic coupledom.

No chance of them becoming serial killers. Yet.

Exactly! The reason why I personally hate SaTC is not because it portrays women having sex and enjoying it, but on the contrary, because it portrays women as (what else?) conservative stereotypes of what happens to women who try to "act like men" and have consequence-free sex--they're always really, deep down, ultimately just "women," which in the show seems to mean co-dependent, marriage-obssessed, sexually neurotic, relationships-as-consumerism cliches. Anyone who watches SaTC and doesn't notice that rather than being point-scoring frat boys, the women are entirely hung up and tortured by ther own lack of competitiveness in the sex-marriage market, is not paying attention. It's condescending. It's ugly. It's sickening. But it's touted as "female empowerment."

If there's ever a show that portrays women who are *actually* sexually liberated, I will be an unrepentant fan. I'm not holding my breath, though.

I never once said I that I "hate men", I pointed out facts about male behaviors and in other posts, facts about the evolutionary history of humans. It's not my fault that men rape women. It's not my fault that in our recent history, humans did not have any concept of "fatherhood" like we have since around the Babylonian era.

I don't believe in the "family" myth, I don't believe families need be the centralmost unit of human social organization. This is not tantamount to misandry. I could go on all day about why. This doesn't mean men are "bad", it just means I don't think men are or should be the "natural" center or authority figure in a family, as most people believe. If I hear one more person blame fatherless homes for situations that are CLEARLY caused by economic hardship and disparity, I'm going to lose it.

And Shonx, I too have all kinds of friends who have been raped and/or sexually assaulted. But they were the vast majority all raped by family members or friends/boyfriends. (Some of them are even men, imagine that.) This anecdotal observation is borne out by most of the available statistics.

Yes, typical heterosexuality bores me, and I have every right to feel this way. Just like you have yours to hold women to a double standard where certain behaviors are "worse" in females. Just admit it, you don't think it's ladylike. It doesn't flatter your ego. It's ok. It's always best to be honest with yourself isnt' it?
 
Last edited:
Top