Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KnifeMissile
Normally, I'd let you come back to me with this 'cause I prefer that people think for themselves but, considering your responses to my posts (or lack, thereof), I'm sensing that you just don't get it so I'm going to spell it out for you.
|
Do me a favor and drop the hostile tone and assumption that I'm somehow beneath your reasoning. I understand what you're trying to say, and I've read all your posts... but I see no reason for you to use such an angry tone.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KnifeMissile
You were raped because you were incapable of giving consent. In your own words, you were "that fucked up." Being stupidly drunk and being drugged are no different (alcohol is a drug, you know...).
|
Okay, here is where we seem to disagree. Who judges "incapability" of giving consent? I was 24 years old. I got myself drunk, and I made myself incapable of remembering anything that would happen to me. I was not drugged, I was not seduced. I fucked myself up. I apparently gave consent to this guy (verbally and physically), though I have no memory of doing so either way.
NONE of that takes away from his crime of taking advantage of the situation, I agree with you on that. However, I do not see myself as some "victim" in that situation. I put myself there, and I made choices that allowed a series of events to take place. Two people are responsible, and I just don't see how any judge or court could split up that responsibility with any fairness. That's why I have/had a problem calling this "rape."