Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackey
Kind of tough to really draw much out of that. The bite marks did strike me as a bit odd though. Why would you want to intetionally leave evidence like that if you were raping someone? Scratches obviously could happen if she resisted. Also interesting she had a friend with her. Wondering where the friend was when this allegedly happened.
|
You seem to have a very strange view of what rape is. If someone is choosing to rape someone they aren't thinking in a rational state, including about what evidence they are leaving behind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackey
I'd have to figure that the situations where the guy honestly didn't think he was raping a woman but she thought he was are extremely rare. I could be wrong but seems like if you were a non agressive decent guy the woman wouldn't fear saying something. If she goes along with it unforced and says nothing then the onus would kind of have to fall on her. People seem to be focusing so much on what is consent. We can talk legalities all we want but I think most adults know what is consent and what is not when it's happening.
|
Again you seem to have this vision that rapists can only be some sort of monster that we can easily identify. Some rape victims knew their rapist - and actually still know them after the incident - because the raper has no idea they did something wrong. Do you think a husband raping his wife identifies himself as a rapist? Or what about a lot of date rapes where the guy just thinks it was a perfect way to end the night. And I would even further and say IF Kane did this - I seriously doubt he sees it as rape. And that's the problem.
I guess the main point though is that even if most adults know what consent is - rapists don't. And rapists comes in all shapes and sizes.