~ archived since 2018 ~

Is this comedy monologue a rape confession?

mellowgreen

September 1, 2011

7 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://jezebel.com/5834712/is-this-comedy-monologue-a-rape-confession

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Is this comedy monologue a rape confession?
Author	mellowgreen
Upvotes	7
Comments	45
Date	September 1, 2011 9:11 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/k1q4h/is_this_comedy_monologue_a_rape_confession/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/is-this-comedy-monologue-a-rape-confession.1035123 https://theredarchive.com/post/1035123

Comments

[–]mellowgreen[S] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago* (34 children) | Copy Link

This has been posted in 2xc and in feminism and the people over there seem to think this is rape, even though she took her own clothes off and consented. There are various justifications for why they think it is rape, she was drunk, she told him to leave repeatedly, and he closed and locked the door behind him, trapping her (as far as I can tell they made up the detail about locking the door).

In my mind, it is not rape as long as she consented, and wasn't forced, threatened, or intimidated into that consent. Coercion is obviously rape, but that's not how I see this situation. The definition of coercion is:

Coercion (pronounced /koʊˈɜrʃən/) is the practice of forcing another party to behave in an involuntary manner (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats, rewards, or intimidation or some other form of pressure or force.

I really don't think this qualifies. What do you guys think?

Edit: this got xposted to shitredditsays already... http://www.reddit.com/r/ShitRedditSays/comments/k1tmv/it_is_not_rape_as_long_as_she_consented_and_wasnt/

They honestly think that what I just said is offensive, and rape apologist type behavior.

HAHA the person deleted their post, or maybe the mods did. I guess my logic was too strong for them.

[–]francomaistre 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Alanna 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]mellowgreen[S] 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

You yourself define "not rape" above as "as long as she consented, and wasn't forced, threatened, or intimidated into that consent." As I said in my other comment, him just showing up is intimidating, as is him following me into the hotel room without me inviting him, also the refusing to leave when asked. When a strange man enters my hotel room, and refuses repeated direct requests to leave, and makes it clear he's come for sex, I think that goes beyond "persistent." "Persistent" is repeatedly calling someone, or repeatedly knocking on their door. And even then, beyond a certain point, that shortly goes past "persistent" and into harassment.

What she could have done, and didn't, doesn't prove consent. Again, disclaimer, I don't know if it's actually rape but, frankly, it's close enough that I'm not at all comfortable with it. Again, also as I said in my other comment, this isn't any case of a woman having sex then regretting it afterwards and calling it rape. This isn't a case of a woman leading a guy on then changing her mind. This isn't a case of a woman getting black out drunk and having drunk sex that she can't remember in the morning. Those are the usual scenarios where I defend those falsely accused of rape. In this particular case, I'm reminded of a story I read on TwoX or feminisms, I think, that a girl told about a friend of hers at a party. All her friends were outside when a guy cornered her and literally would not let her past while repeatedly asking for sex. She kept asking him to let her get back to the party, telling him no, her boyfriend wouldn't like it. Finally when no one came to her rescue, she ended up giving a blow job to get him to let her go. My first reaction was, that's not rape-- if she'd struggled, or screamed, or put up any kind of fight, odds are he probably would have let her go. Grudgingly, but he probably would have let her go. But that's beside the point. Such a guy is obviously being verbally and passively physically coercive. It's not meaningful consent in any way if a sex act is some kind of toll you have to pay to get past a guy. There shouldn't be room for miscommunication there. She said to leave, like, three times. Then she gave up. That shouldn't make it not rape.

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Alanna 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

You're just wrong. Being persistent does not make it rape. If most guys weren't persistent they would never get laid because they aren't good looking enough for most stuck up girls.

We're not talking about a guy who keeps trying to talk to a girl at the bar-- though, I'm sorry, I'm a woman, and most girls, when they say they want to be left alone, want to be left alone. Really really truly.

If a girl is that "stuck up," why would you want to? I don't get it.

The woman let him in, he didn't force himself into the room.

No, she didn't. She answered the door, told him to leave, then turned around and walked away. He let himself in.

She obviously did not find him very attractive based on her reaction but none the less was in the mood for sex expecting the other dude to be there, she was simply too embarrassed to come on to him so his persistent was required.

You're reading an awful lot into this. She was in the mood for sex with the other dude, maybe, sure, but that doesn't mean anything with regards to the dude who showed up. Are guys interchangeable now, even just as casual sex partners? And, seriously, this assumption right here that she had to be too embarrassed to come on to him so "persistance was required" is what generates talk about "rape culture." Persistance is never required. If it's required, you are working way too hard for some casual sex, and seriously risking raping someone. Sure, it may have happened like you said, but how do you know she didn't, you know, mean exactly what she said when she told him to leave, and the "persistance" was actually "coercion"?

From my personal experience and the others I know this is common when trying to score with a woman that is way out of your league.

So because she's way hotter than you could normally score, simply not taking no for an answer until she fucks you is acceptable? You find this completely okay?

At any point in her situation she could have stopped it all

Asking him to leave at least three times doesn't count as trying to stop it? Are you saying that violent physical struggle has to ensue for it to be rape? Why should it ever have to get to that point? Why can't "I want you to leave" be respected? Oh, right, because persistence is required or douchebags would never score.

but she was cooperative instead

Asking him to leave, then disrobing just enough to let him fuck her, then passively lying there is not "cooperative" to me. If that's "cooperative" to you, I'm kind of worried for the girls you hit on.

Have you ever had sex with a girl that you normally wouldn't simply because she was putting forth the effort?

No, I'm a woman, but I don't see how that remotely applies to this situation-- she put out no effort to have sex with this guy whatsoever, and actively, repeatedly ASKED HIM TO LEAVE. She clearly did not want to have sex with him. This is not a girlfriend or wife having not-in-the-mood-sex in the normal give-and-take of a relationship, this is a strange guy persisting on a woman who clearly did not want to have sex with him. As I said, I have serious doubts as to whether it legally meets the standard for rape, but that doesn't mean he's a great person or what he did was perfectly fine.

Edit: You also never addressed your whole implication that request for condom = consent. Based on that alone, I don't think you have a very good idea what constitutes rape.

[–]tsfn46290 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

It's not rape, you are completely wrong. No force, no threat of force. No coercion, just persistence. He said she left the door open when she walked away, that doesn't exactly scream "please leave me alone" to me.

Your argument assumes that sex == rape by default in the absence of explicit consent. This is simply not the world we live in and it's not the rules most people play by.

There is such a thing as implicit consent. Someone does not need to say "yes, I wish to have sex with you." If they do not take what a reasonable person would consider to be preventative measures in stopping a sexual act from occurring than it's not rape.

By reasonable preventive measures, I do not mean guns, locks, not dressing slutty, or whatever other ridiculous things you probably jumped to in your mind. What I mean is stopping or attempting to stop someone from continuing. if i got to take your pants off and you say, "no, don't take my pants off" then that's a reasonable attempt. If I put a gun to your head, then doing nothing in that situation is reasonable, but that wasn't the case here.

Sure, she told him to leave initially, but that merely means he illegally entered her apartment. After that the situation changed. When she kissed him back all of those previous rejections went out the window. At that point, what matters is what she does going forward. She let him finger her. She made the distinction between saying "no, i don't want to take my top off" but failed to make the same distinction regarding her pants. She then asked if he had a condom. In that context, yes, that should constitute consent.

How the hell is that possibly rape or even close to it? Look at it from the guys point of view for a minute. He talks his way into staying in the apartment, she was clearly horney to begin with. He starts kissing her, she kisses pack. She quote "pinned him" down even. He then takes off her pants and she specifies that she doesn't want her shirt to come off. Maybe she's fat and self conscience about it. She verifies that he does in fact have a condom. Does she just lie there? Sure, but what does that prove? Are you saying that all women are wild in bed? The term (as applied to women) frigid exists for a reason and it's not extremely uncommon.

If you believe in equality then you need to believe in equality. Women are not precious little flowers that will be destroyed the first time you touch them. No, she doesn't have to have a violent struggle, but you need to properly indicate that sex is not something that's desired.

I find your comments on this extremely disturbing.

[–]Alanna -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

My response here is in the context of the commenter above saying that "persistence was required" "in his experience" (and his friends') for or "most guys wouldn't get laid." Being persistent in a public setting, depending on a variety of factors, can be endearing or jerky. Being persistent in a private setting like this is just creepy. I stop short of calling it actual, legal rape, but considering she asked him to leave multiple times, he didn't seem welcome, and she didn't seem to be ripping her clothes off for him, I can definitely see where this is a borderline case.

I'm not calling for his head, I just wouldn't want him near my daughter. And I find the assertion that persistence is "required" in order for most guys to get laid a strong indication that this guy is doing it wrong.

Edit: I don't think explicit consent is required. But in the absence of explicit consent, there shouldn't be signs of clear nonconsent, such as multiple requests to leave, including when she very first opened the door. Something is seriously wrong if you have to say to a strange woman with whom you are alone that you're not leaving until you get some.

[–]tsfn46290 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I don't think explicit consent is required. But in the absence of explicit consent, there shouldn't be signs of clear nonconsent, such as multiple requests to leave, including when she very first opened the door.

I already addressed this in my original post. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not she consented to sex. It may constitute trespassing, but nothing else. After that the situation changed and that's what is relevant.

My response here is in the context of the commenter above saying that "persistence was required" "in his experience" (and his friends') for or "most guys wouldn't get laid."

Maybe, but it has been your overall attitude in this whole therad that I find disturbing. In this instance you are no better (and on the same logical footing) as the crazy feminists who argue all sex is rape.

[–]Alanna1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tsfn462903 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What you are advocating for is that the default position is that sex is rape barring explicit approval. Regardless of whether yous aid above that you don't mean explicit approval, everything else you said clearly indicates that you do. You seem completely fixated on the fact that she initially asked him to leave. What I don't understand is how the negates everything else that happened?

I know you're not a stupid person so you clearly must have the rest of what happened in your head as well. With that in mind, you've decided to write off the fact that she made no attempts to call the police, hotel security, who ever in order to have him removed from the room, she didn't continue asking him to leave, that she kissed him back, that she pinned him down, that she made sure he had a condom, that she let him finger her, etc.

So according to your logic, none of that indicated consent. That fact that she didn't come out and say "yes, please have sex with me" means that all of that is off the table.

You claim what you are saying is this...

"all sex is rape" to "guys have to keep trying to initiate sex with a girl until she gives in or they'd never get laid"

but it's not. Previously in the thread you said

I don't know if it's actually rape but, frankly, it's close enough that I'm not at all comfortable with it.

So clearly you think it's "close enough" which is what I'm referring to. Was it a creepy thing for him to do? I dunno, maybe, I wasn't there. I didn't see how she said get out. You seem to assume that she screamed "get out" or said it in a forceful, direct way. How do you know it wasn't playful? She didn't even bother to shut the door, so the idea that she might have been so afraid for her safety as to have constituted coerced is ludicrous.

Your comment:

As I said in my other comment, him just showing up is intimidating, as is him following me into the hotel room without me inviting him,

is silly. If she was afraid of him she should have shut the door. She clearly wasn't.

As for all your persistence comments and the fact that you find zomgwaffles comments creepy, you are being morally superior without and extremely literal just to be a troll I believe. What does it matter if it's creepy? What zomgwaffles says is correct at a high level. Not for all women, but definitely for some. That doesn't necessarily mean standing in her hotel room and begging her for sex, but the general idea of needing to be persistent to get a girl. Do you honestly think it's always as easy as "hey, let's go out?" If so, it indicates you are a women more than your name does.

As for the standing in the hotel room? Is that creepy? Maybe, depending on the circumstances. But we don't know what kind of non-verbal cues she was giving off. Or her intonation when she was talking to him. It all depends on the situation. And no, that doesn't all indicate consent to fuck someone, but it can indicate consent to try and kiss them. What happens from there depends on what happens from there.

[–]Alanna1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I wrote out a whole reply, and I started to type at the end that if it gets to the point where the girl has to physically resist or scream or call the police, it's gone way too far. And in a sane world, that would be true, but I can also see where a guy could legitimately push it that far without any intention of using any kind of force or threats, and I also realize that different girls will draw that line at different places, and the reductio ad absurdum would be a guy getting charged with attempted rape for your simple, "hey, let's go out?" Before that point, it is just persistence, and saying otherwise is preemptively calling him a rapist-- which goes against everything I believe.

Having said that, I do maintain it's creepy to say that you're not leaving until you get some, and I also maintain that asking the guy to use a condom, by itself, does not indicate consent, nor does removing clothes. I also still find zomgwaffle's assertion that most women are stuck up and "require persistence" to be a little creepy as well. But I retract the allegations of rape.

[–]woofoo1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Alanna0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Alanna 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not a guy, no, but you're making a lot of assumptions about women based on what some women do. Granted, yes, some women like to play hard to get. But even what you're saying-- no woman likes to be pursued by a guy she thinks is unattractive. Repeated rejections mean just that, rejection. At best, in some situations, such as public venues, you're being a complete jerk, and when you take it private, like this, you're definitely venturing into borderline rape territory, depending on just how "persistent" you get. The bottom line is, if a strange woman doesn't want to have sex with you, and you keep going, that's rape. I defend false rape allegations as much as the next guy, and I don't necessarily think there's enough evidence to convict this guy in a court of law, assuming the story is even true, which, as mellowyellow says, it may or may not be, but there's no question that it's morally reprehensible, and the fact that you seem to indicate you and your friends have engaged in similar behavior is really making me question a lot of my previously held assumptions about most men being clear on what constitutes rape.

Tl;dr - would you want some guy pursuing your daughter the way this guy did, the way you say you and your friends have? Not taking no for an answer?

Edit: corrected a couple typos.

[–]woofoo -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]woofoo -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I think the guy's an utter piece of shit who showed up uninvited, was asked to leave repeatedly, and insisted on going forward anyway. Is it rape? I'd have to see more of his actual words, rather than the Jezebel (and other bloggers') paraphrasing, but I have to say that showing up to someone's hotel room uninvited in the middle of the night (as opposed to, say, sharing an elevator, btw) is intimidating by itself, and not leaving when asked to is even moreso.

If it happened the way they are saying he says it did (which is why I said I'd like to see his own words, I can't watch videos at work, but there's too much hearsay there), this isn't any case of a woman having sex then regretting it afterwards and calling it rape. This isn't a case of a woman leading a guy on then changing her mind. This isn't a case of a woman getting black out drunk and having drunk sex that she can't remember in the morning. The best case is that she decided it would be too much trouble and/or make too much of a scene to get him to leave and had sex with him to get rid of him. But to deny there was any pressure or intimidation here is just naive.

I've read a fair number of your comments, and I don't think you're a rape apologist, but I do disagree with you on this.

[–]mellowgreen[S] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]barbadosslim -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]mellowgreen[S] 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]barbadosslim -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]barbadosslim 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]woofoo 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]barbadosslim 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThePigman 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mellowgreen[S] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The best case scenario is that a woman had reluctant sex with a guy she didn't want to because he refused to leave her hotel room until she did.

Well, no, I take that back, the best case is that the whole thing is made up and the guy just has a weird sense of humor.

But assuming it's true, at best, he used tacit intimidation and verbal coercion (refusing to leave when asked, kissing her when she obviously had no interest in pursuing sex with him, continuing to ignore her repeated requests to leave) to pressure a woman to have sex. Was she actually "forced?" Technically, no, which is why I stop short of saying he definitely raped her, but his actions were in no way cool, and I have to admit it's much easier to read between the lines and get "rape" than "she changed her mind and decided to ride him like a stallion."

I do have to say that I find some of the replies, particularly those of zomgwaffles, to be much more disturbing than the original incident. Taking off your clothes is consent? Asking the guy to wear a condom is consent? Persistence is "required" for most guys to get laid? If she finds you unattractive, it's perfectly okay to just lay on the verbal pressure until she gives in, literally not taking no for an answer?

I can see a gray area. I can definitely see where, on principle, we shouldn't convict this guy because it opens the way to much grayer areas where women are more clearly consenting. But you guys are not just legally, but morally and ethically defending a complete douchebag. I don't get it.

[–]spagma 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]spagma 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Well, at least you're not arguing that sometimes persistence is "required" like the other guy, that a woman might not want to sleep with you, but that just means you keep asking until she's verbally bludgeoned enough to say, okay, fine, just get it over with.

I wasn't trying to say it was cut-and-dried, but it's pretty slimy. I think it's fairly obvious that she didn't want to have sex with him, and he persisted until she reluctantly capitulated. I don't ever get the impression she was enthusiastic during the encounter, so she was inconsistent between rejection (asking him to leave) and minimal cooperation (taking off her pants, asking him to use protection). Inconsistent is acceptable as an excuse if she's vacillating between ripping your clothes off and saying, "We shouldn't do this."

Let me put it this way-- I see no clear signs of consent (some maybes, yes, but nothing that clearly says to me that she wanted to have sex) AND there were clear signs of nonconsent (asking him to leave). When there are both clear signs of consent and nonconsent, I can see where confusion arises. When she says, I think you should leave, you should fucking leave. If she's playing hard to get, that's her loss, but what if she's not, and she really meant it?

I absolutely agree that some girls should stop playing coy and hard to get and muddy the consent waters, but I completely fail to see how that makes it okay to just assume that every girl likes to play hard to get (to the point of telling you to leave three times). Don't try to tell me "then guys would never get laid." There's plenty of women out there who don't pull this bullshit (I'd venture to say, most of them in my experience, but I certainly haven't conducted an exhaustive study), and if the ones who did didn't get rewarded for it, they'd stop.

[–]spagma 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

This is where we differ. I don't think it is fairly obvious as you state, that she didn't want to have sex with him. If this was the case she would have rejected his advances which she did not seem to do at all.

There is no basis for your claim that she reluctantly capitulated. We have no information on that she may have enthusiastically capitulated, it is simply not stated how into it she was. But we do know that according to the story, she was 'making out' while she was on top of him pinning him down. That does not sound like reluctant participation.

You state that she cooperated minimally. First, there is not enough information to know how much she cooperated, we only know what he has told us. Secondly, it can be argued that minimum cooperation is at least minimum consent.

Now I am not saying this guy is awesome or anything. The whole situation sounds pretty sleazy, but it doesn't sound like rape.

[–]Alanna 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Now I am not saying this guy is awesome or anything. The whole situation sounds pretty sleazy, but it doesn't sound like rape.

That's what I'm saying. It could very easily have been rape, though, just not provable rape. It could also have gone the other way. But I see guys defending this guy morally and ethically as well as legally, and I never thought I'd say this (I have a really really long comment history of aggressively and at length defending false rape accusation victims and the circumstances that lead to false rape accusation) but I begin to see what the feminists say when they talk about there being a problem with recognizing meaningful consent. By the guy's own admission, she was not happy to see him, she was expecting the cute waiter to whom she gave her number. I honestly cannot see any scenario in which she asks him to leave her room five times but didn't really mean it, unless she found him ridiculously irrisistible, which she clearly didn't, and even he admits.

I'm not asking if he belongs in jail, I'm saying, would you do this to someone? Would you high-five a friend who said he'd done this? Would you be cool with someone doing this to your mom (if she's single), your sister, or your daughter?

[–]spagma 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]woofoo 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Alanna -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link