Woman Says Rape, Judge says Sex Was In The Air

While it is certainly true that when a woman OR man says No any sexual activity should stop, it certainly sounds like there may have been some extenuating circumstances in this case.

Originally posted by King_John
While I agree that this judgment was dumb, and rape is rape no matter what, woman really should dress for an occasion. If you don't want guys to think sex is an option, don't try to put it out there with you're attire.

No thank you, women arent' going to dress like the Muslims. Just saying.

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
NO. You men will think a woman in jeans and a tank is putting sex out there. Don't blame the woman, learn how to have self control.

LOL I must have remarkable self control! - Really, there have been times where girls have had to 'sleep the booze off' - well in those cases it's not actually sleep, it is passing out and that is actually quite dangerous - I have spent hours into the morning hours on a bed with 2 or 3 other passed out and very hot young women, them unconscious, me watching the telly on low (I'm quite an experienced drunk lol) - it would be so easy those times to have my way, but all I'm interested in is them possibly choking on vomit or maybe hitting their head some how.

This is why I fall so easily into the 'friend zone'... Gawddammit! But really some men have very little impulse control, and women should know that - it may be hard to spot especially after a few drinks, but there would be warning signs.

But rape is rape, the guy needs nailing to a wall.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


The underlying message being..."Rape is bad! Oh she was bein slutty? Well in that case..."

Dressing in a tube top without a bra and lots of makeup on is an invitation to be raped?
I missed the part where there was a "before-rape" dress code. A brassier is merely an accessory for comfort and I didn't realize wearing lots of makeup makes you a slut.
I'll make sure I'm wearing a long sleeve tshirt over my bathing suit with a fresh, clean face next time I go to the beach. Wouldn't want my rapist to get away with it!

Originally posted by King_John
While I agree that this judgment was dumb, and rape is rape no matter what, woman really should dress for an occasion. If you don't want guys to think sex is an option, don't try to put it out there with you're attire.

If a girl is dressing to impress and get laid...that still doesn't mean she wants to get with every guy she sees out that night. Sex may be an option but with a guy she WANTS to hook up with. Maybe that's any guy she finds attractive, but it's still up to her

Until it's socially acceptable to wear a sign saying who you want to bang while you're out, we'll have to control ourselves

I realize no one knows anything about the case actually.

Everyone just seems to comment their opinions based on their pre-conceived notions.

So I kind of consider all of these opinions as pointless displays of prejudice.

Pro or Con. Doesn't really matter.

Everyone passing judgement without knowing anything. That's how we do things on Earth.

Oh well. I'll just try to raise my kids correctly and hopefully prevent something like this happening to them one day.

What else can I do? I sure as hell don't want to get on the knee-jerk reaction wagon.
I am trying consciously to overcome my natural human tendency of prejudice.

It would be nice if you folks liked that idea and wanted to join in, and withhold judgement for a bit. Would be really cool actually.

Point being, that even though the laws in Canada on sexual assault seem well thought out, formulated, and written, and he was convicted, this judge still found a way to insert what are apparently his own feelings on the matter into the sentencing and while doing so victimize the victim yet again and also trivialize the severity of the crime. That's the reprehensible part.

reply to post by muzzleflash

Ahem. Everybody?

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
www.winnipegfreepress.com...

A convicted rapist will not go to jail because a Manitoba judge says the victim sent signals that "sex was in the air" through her suggestive attire and flirtatious conduct on the night of the attack.

Kenneth Rhodes was given a two-year conditional sentence last week which allows him to remain free in the community, in a decision likely to trigger strong debate. The Crown wanted at least three years behind bars.

Related Items
Articles
Prof: 'What is the signal we're sending here?' Queen's Bench Justice Robert Dewar called Rhodes a "clumsy Don Juan" who may have misunderstood what the victim wanted when he forced intercourse along a darkened highway outside Thompson in 2006.

Rhodes and a friend met the 26-year-old woman and her girlfriend earlier that night outside a bar under what the judge called "inviting circumstances." Dewar specifically noted the women were wearing tube tops with no bra, high heels and plenty of makeup.

"They made their intentions publicly known that they wanted to party," said Dewar.

Here we have another woman hating man sitting on the bench, giving a rapist a free pass by shifting blame for the crime to the fact the woman wore a tube top, high heels and make up. How do these kind of people end up on the bench? The rapist goes free and a woman has in essense been raped twice, once by the cretin rapist, and twice by the JUDGE who she was begging for justice!!

Here is a picture of this man, who needs to step down, because he has lost his mind and sense.




This is just disgusting. Dewar the creep judge, claims that wanting to party equates consent to sex.

awww, doesn't it suck when the Judge's bigotry is floating the other way. I wonder if your this outraged every time a woman get's away with murdering a man? Or if you feel this level of umbrage over the massive gender gap in sentencing?

Yawn... Still no way near as outrageous as when Judges make male rape victims pay their female rapist child support.

reply to post by korathin


Issues with relativism? Where in this thread or article is anyone arguing that one "side" is more or less guilty than another of wrongdoing? Or that it's okay for one "side" to do this and not the other? Or that it's some sort of us-vs-them game to others as it appears to be to you?

For the record, you are the one who brought this level of ignorance and childish finger pointing into it. (Can you just hear the accompanying "neener neener" sound effects here?)

i think a lot of you are looking at this in the wrong way. now understand, i am in no way condoning rape. it is wrong in every degree, BUT you have to look at it from the judges point of view and on the evidence laid in front of him. these girls were out dressed like sluts, flirting with people and sending mixed signals. their whole obvious plan for that night was to get laid. they carried themselves like whores and based on that what happened happened. i just had a conversation with my girlfriend about this and she herself agrees that the judge was correct in his ruling. women should know better then to do things like that to men and should know better than to dress like whores (essentially making an entire gender look bad, as my girlfriend said and no shes not some up tight religious fool).

now like i said i do not condone rape at all, but with all the people in the world crying rape like timmy did with crying "WOLF!" its no wonder this happened to the girl who was taken advantage of. also anyone who has ever been falsely accused of rape knows how absolutely horrible it feels. im not saying the guy didn't rape these chicks, but you all have to look at it from a different perspective.

I think Dave Chapelle coveres an area of this arguement quite well. lol

Originally posted by muzzleflash
no one knows anything about the case actually.

...thats the norm for ats...

...i did a brief search for more info but found nothing that gave more insight... i'd like to read the court transcripts, specifically the parts that tell about how rhodes and the accuser got their wires crossed... all we know is that he met the accuser and her girlfriend outside of a bar...

...where did the rape happen?... in the bar parking lot?... he didnt force her into a vehicle or force her to go anywhere else or the charges wouldve been different...

...so, did they agree to go off somewhere more private to smoke a joint or get drunk(er)?... did she go alone or did her girlfriend go with her?...

...was rhodes a stranger to her?... kinda dumb to go off with a stranger but women do it all the time and most of the time nothing bad happens... him being a stranger doesnt prove anything except she used poor judgment... stats show that many women are raped by familiars...

...is she married or does she have a significant other who smelled sex on her when she got home and, so, crying rape was better (for her) than telling him the truth?... it happens...

...how quickly did she report the rape?... immediately?... the morning after?... couple days later?... did she go to a clinic / hospital or to the police?... was there a medical examination?... did she have vaginal bruising or tearing?... rape can happen without violent intercourse but i'd like to know the facts...

...he either admitted to having intercourse with her or there is dna evidence that he couldnt deny - but - what led up to the rape?... was she dancing around naked or was she behaving herself and he just decided to rip her panties off and have his way?...

...without the answers to all those questions (and more), no one can fairly determine if the ruling was wrong or not or if the judge's comments were inappropriate or not...

reply to post by hotbakedtater


He looks like a tight-ass. So I think he's inviting gay rape.

reply to post by jonnywhite


i dont think so, it said he got a 2 year conditional sentence. If u get a sentence of any kind from a crime then u must be guilty? Am i correct, i live in aus your laws may be different but it would sure be hard to sentence someone who is proven innocent in a court of law. Very disturbing! Rapists and paedophiles alike should be castrated.

reply to post by XelNaga


that is disgusting that you think like that, especially in this day and age. Trying to make out that its not the poor guys fault for raping someone is truely disturbing. The worse thing is you and your girlfriend might have children and breed another generation that thinks that way. Dont let your daughters out in a mini skirt buddy, they might bump in to someone with your values!

reply to post by korathin

Feel free to make a thread on the topic you are inserting here. The topic here is a rape victims revictimization by a misogynist judge.

The comments here are certainly interesting to me.

I have to point out however, that no where in that article does it claim the "victim" actually said "no" or "stop". The fact is this article tells us everything about the sentencing, it tells us what the accused is being accused of, but it gives zero detail regarding the actual "crime".

Before calling for this judge to step down, maybe it would be a good idea to get more details about this case?

damn that dude loks creepy. he has that smirk on his face, like he likes underage sex or sexual offenders...its a relaly perverted smirk he has.. something is DEF up with that guy. he looks like he is jsut sitting thier, smilling at the raped woman, like life is fine and dandy.. mental case!

HE loks like a guy who finds a woman revolting, or a butler on '___' kinda!