Butthurt white guys, an Asian virgin and an angry lesbian walk into a bar...

Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,480
22,330
Cad_sl said:
All you're looking at is the cases with no proof where the cops tell the woman there's no proof, and act like thats just mansplaining her rights away and "discouraging women to file charges" ... As usual, you don't understand what you're talking about but you'revery upsetandsomething needs to be done.
Click to expand...
I'm not that upset. None of this really effects me. But from an outsider looking, the system looks fucking stupid.

Undereporting is still a big problem, while false claims are more common than they should be. Clearly something isn't working.
 
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
I guess you're right. I don't understand the problem. It sounds entirely like emotional non-sense. I can tell that you're angry and want a better outcome for victims of this crime (a noble sentiment). But for the rest... I'm sorry that I can't make sense out of the insensible. I'm told that it's something of a character flaw.

So what is the problem? That rape charges are low, convictions are lower, and that victims themselves are hesitant to seek redress because of an onerous system? Ok, I'll agree that's potentially a problem. No one should feel like the courts are just gonna rape them twice. So how does this become less of a problem while respecting a few ideas? 1) The rights of the accused must be observed. 2) The responsibility of the accuser must be met. 3) The standard of evidence presented must be standard and further it must be empirical in nature.

You can do that for certain types of rape and meet with some success. And we do do that for certain types of rape and meet with some success.

But we're all grown ups... I think we can maybe concede that rape is also very often a circumstantial crime. I've never liked the term "date rape", because it makes it sound like "rape light, now with only 1/2 the harm!", and I wish I knew a better term for it. But it's a thing. And how are you going to prove a circumstantial crime without circumstantial evidence when the sex itself is not the crime, the question of consent (and the quality / validity of that consent) is at issue? Remember, rape is not a sexual crime, it's just a sex crime.

You're all over the place with this... and I'm not trying to be a condescending jackass. So far we've got 1) More privacy considerations (so that victims may be more forthcoming? to protect the accused? To protect the accuser even?). Ok... good. I honestly don't know if it's practical, but in theory that sounds like a pretty not-bad idea to me! Filtering out frivolity is not the INTENTION of that, it is only a likely effect.
 
Ridas

Ridas

Pay to play forum
2,868
4,111
time-is-a-flat-circle.jpg
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
24,498
45,439
Kirun_sl said:
That poor girl. Getting her name and character drug through the mud like that. Fucking sensationalist media!
Click to expand...
You have to respect the man for coming forward despite the withering media and law enforcement pressure to not bring charges too. I wonder if he adequately manages his post-rape PTSD triggers
 
Kirun

Kirun

Buzzfeed Editor
<Gold Donor>
18,741
34,939
Cad_sl said:
You have to respect the man for coming forward despite the withering media and law enforcement pressure to not bring charges too. I wonder if he adequately manages his post-rape PTSD triggers
Click to expand...
If he had managed to get this broad pregnant, would he be on the hook for child support? Nowthat'sfucking male privilege.
 
AladainAF

AladainAF

Best Rabbit
<Gold Donor>
12,867
30,828
Kirun_sl said:
If he had managed to get this broad pregnant, would he be on the hook for child support? Nowthat'sfucking male privilege.
Click to expand...
LOL, that's funny you mention that.

County of San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J. (1996) :: :: California Court of Appeal Decisions :: California Case Law :: California Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia

OPINION

GILBERT, J.

Victims have rights. Here, the victim also has responsibilities.

A 34-year-old woman seduces a 15-year-old boy and becomes pregnant. She gives birth to a daughter and thereafter applies for Aid to Families with Dependent Children. Is the child's father obligated to pay child support even though he is a victim of statutory rape? (Pen. Code, ? 261.5, subd. (d).)We conclude he is liable for child support.

Defendant Nathaniel J. appeals a judgment establishing paternity and reserving an order of child support. We affirm.
Click to expand...
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
24,498
45,439
AladainAF

AladainAF

Best Rabbit
<Gold Donor>
12,867
30,828
Then why talk about "the victim also has responsibilities"? Why not just say - exactly what you just did?

Edit: And not to mention, not only has she ruined this boys life by raping him, but she's also ruined his life by putting under the gun for child support for 18 years - and the kid is just 15. How is there any situation where she is allowed to exert that level of control over a victim like that? To me, that's like a guy raping a woman and getting her pregnant and then the courts ruling that she is not allowed to have an abortion because the rapist wants the baby.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
24,498
45,439
AladainAF_sl said:
Then why talk about "the victim also has responsibilities"? Why not just say - exactly what you just did?
Click to expand...
It does. From your link

California law provides that every child has a right to support from both parents. (Fam. Code, ?? 3900, 3901 [former Civ. Code, ?? 196, 196a, 242]; County of Shasta v. Caruthers (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 1838, 1841 [38 Cal.Rptr.2d 18].) Family Code section 3900 provides that, subject to other statutes governing support, the father and mother of a child bear "equal responsibility" to support the child.

The law should not except Nathaniel J. from this responsibility because he is not an innocent victim of Jones's criminal acts. After discussing the matter, he and Jones decided to have sexual relations. They had sexual intercourse approximately five times over a two-week period.

"This State's interest in requiring minor parents to support their children overrides the State's competing interest in protecting juveniles from improvident acts, even when such acts may include criminal activity on the part of the other parent." (Id., at p. 1279.)

child's interests in receiving support supersedes economic consequences minor father suffers from statutory rape;
Click to expand...
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,499
50,688
So since the mother is a convicted sex offender, why would the father not get custody and then SHE would be on the hook for child support?

Also I've decided that, given the context, Sansa was raped. Because based on her decision making process, a reasonable person can only conclude that she is absolutely fucking retarded and a retard can't give consent.
 
Palum

Palum

what Suineg set it to
23,615
34,165
Yea statutory rape that was consensual is a bit different.

I do remember a few Boston Legal episodes covering male parental rights though, including one where some chick gives a BJ to a black dude then spits up into a tube and brings it to a fertility clinic to have a black kid. lol.
 
AladainAF

AladainAF

Best Rabbit
<Gold Donor>
12,867
30,828
Statutory rape is almost always "consensual", except that one person is too young to give "consent".

So, while "consensual", it wasn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.