Communicator (communicator) wrote,
Communicator
communicator

rant

There is a high profile case in the UK at the moment which concerns a 17 year old girl. She says that she went to a footbal player's hotel room to have sex with him. She says that seven of his friends came in, she didn't want to have sex with all of them, but five of them forced her to. These allegations have not yet been proved, and I know nothing more about the case than what I say here.

But Barbara Amiel has strong opinions over at the Daily Telegraph.

Any woman crying rape under such factual circumstances would have had to show feeble-mindedness to warrant society’s protection. Going voluntarily up to a stranger’s room for intercourse or its preliminaries, and expecting a man to behave as a light switch that can be turned off at will, may be technically her right, but it is both biologically and logically mad.

Notice, Barbara is saying that if the girl is reporting events accurately, then she was 'mad' to expect protection from rape in such circumstances.

Is there any woman reading this who has not gone voluntarily to someone's room for sexual intercourse? (Maybe not to a stranger's room, but I would guess to someone's room who you don't know that well, perhaps early in a relationship). Are you then 'logically mad' not to expect five other guys to turn up and fuck you against your will?

Is there any women reading this who hasn't ever decided to abbreviate a sexual encounter? Men can always cope with that can't they? I wouldn't call it 'behaving like a light switch' but 'behaving like a sentient being'. Of course action can be 'turned off at will' - that's what 'will' means. Why don't men complain about this kind of characterisation, which paints them as more degraded than animals?

From crooked timber (there are some nutty responses there too).
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic
  • 6 comments