What do you think of this?
Two cheerleaders in the Bensonville “rape” case were found guilty and will now face imprisonment and a lifetime membership on the Registered List of Sex Offenders. That is a tragedy for the girls, for justice and for the victims of actual rape. As we go through this case, ask yourself who benefits from this verdict, and why.
Most of the facts in this case seem relatively incontrovertible: a young man, 125 lbs soaking wet, who was not part of the regular social group, went to a cheerleader’s party, in a town mad for cheering as a sport, got trashed out of his mind, voluntarily accompanied two of the most popular cheerleaders to another party, passed out and then got treated like a joke of a man-whore.
In a moment of mind-numbing stupidity, the girls opted to film their “assault” on the boy, which involved pulling down his pants and masturbating him to erection while he was passed out. Rather than leave him in a ditch somewhere, they dragged him around to different locations, none of which had any adult supervision.
What the fuck, Bensonville? Where are all the goddamn grown-ups?
The law in Nevada states that ANY non-consensual sexual contact, however slight, constitutes rape. Let’s start there. Comparing a stupid, drunk, pom-pom chasing boy-slut who got handled while passed out to an actual rape victim is completely and utterly absurd.
This is rape:
So is this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-de-buitleir/male-rape-the-resilient-taboo_b_1912887.html
And this:
http://goqnotes.com/296/male-rape-victim-shares-his-story/
Comparing those cases, or any of the other truly brutal rapes to what happened in Bensonville is comparing this:
To this
Anyone who stood around moaning that the slight fender bender they got into at the mall is comparable to a fiery, multiple car crash on the interstate would immediately be dismissed as the most self-absorbed narcissist lacking any kind of empathy or perspective. We have a word to describe people like that: we call them assholes.
Now, the boy in Bensonville takes full responsibility for his decision to follow copious amounts of vodka shooters with a whole lot of beer. He’s not blaming anyone for “making him drink”. Even so…. just because he was skirt-chasing while drunk doesn’t mean the skirts had the right to humiliate him by taking cock-shots, right?
The most telling thing about this whole case is that multiple people saw the wanna-be-cheer-pimp passed out and dragged about by a couple of bitchy cheerleaders, and make no mistake, those ladies behaved shamefully. Part of having the adulation and admiration that comes along with being a small town cheerleader is not to abuse that power when the little wanna-bang-a-cheerleader lotharios come a-calling, and those girls failed.
Punishment>crime
That boy had no friends at the party, not one person had enough respect for him to step in, he was not part of the social tribe and there is no way in hell he did not know that. He went to that party to nab himself a cheerleader, and lo and behold, the cheerleaders didn’t really like such an obvious grasp at their glory.
Find yourself another wagon to hitch to, little star.
The saddest thing is that the girls sobbingly admit that they ruined his life! They are accused of having “no moral code”! Oh, and the boy had an impeccable one, did he?
RUINED HIS LIFE?!?!
Are you fucking kidding me? The girls are going to jail! They will be registered sex offenders! They are convicted criminals! One night of behaving like bitches will follow them the rest of their lives, and HIS LIFE IS RUINED?
His life is not ruined in the slightest. LittlePimp is free to go about his life, getting as drunk as he likes, chasing after any gorgeous girl he likes, and securing criminal convictions against women who treat him like the skirt-chasing party boy that he is.
God help the cheerleaders at whatever college campus he ends up on, and no doubt LittlePimp will get back on his feet after suffering a little humiliation and continue on with his life because HE’S RUINED.
The young women in this case will never escape the disgustingly unfair consequences of a night of acting like stuck-up cunts, while the young man will carry on, and probably come to find the night the cheerleaders took pictures of his dick to be pretty hilarious, because that tends to be what guys do. They get the fuck over this kind of shit, and understand they have some responsibility for what happens to them when they’re drunk.
http://judgybitch.com/2012/10/22/54/
You know what we need? We need a Drunk Pimp Registry. If sex offenders are registered for the protection of all men, then why not register drunk pimps for the protection of all women? It’s true that women could protect themselves by not acting like bitches, but combine small-town celebrity with lots of alcohol and no adult supervision, and you WILL get women acting like assholes and men acting like sluts.
When we only punish one side on that equation, we have a serious cultural problem. Women are held to account for their irresponsible decisions made while young and stupid and drunk, but men are not? Most crimes acknowledge explicitly that mitigating circumstances create different categories of crime with correspondingly progressive punishments. Why is rape different?
The punishment these girls face, which will be in effect for THE REST OF THEIR LIVES is way out of proportion to the “crime”. The definition of rape in Nevada is so broadly defined that the act of being a bitch is now as serious as the act of fucking a man forcibly and against his will. And if you don’t think there is a material difference between getting handled and getting fucked, you are probably a retard.
Getting drunk and chasing after cheerleaders demonstrates a level of stupidity and disrespect for the humanity of the women in question (who are valued only for their status and beauty), and that disrespect was returned. But only the girls are held responsible for that.
I say bullshit. No one got raped in Bensonville. Someone got humiliated, and he participated willingly and readily in his own humiliation. Turning stupid decisions made by high-school students into criminal acts with consequences that will follow only ONE party for their rest of their lives is deeply unfair, and when taking cock-shots of a lounge lizard at an alcohol fuelled party is put in the same category as violent sexual assault, the real victims are drowned in a chorus of pathetic mewlings of men who didn’t get to bag the star.
Who thinks that if the young man had woken up the next morning next to the cheerleader, her arms wrapped around him in a loving embrace, he would have considered a few dick shots the price he had to pay to land the big fish?
Bensonville: sour fucking grapes.
Not just sour, bitter, too. But only for the women.
How is that justice? Who is served when those girls are locked up? Who is protected? Who wins? How ironic is it that the adults who were NOT present to lend some sanity to what their own children were up to are now fully involved to make certain only the girls are punished?
People make stupid decisions. They act like idiots. They treat other people with a lack of respect. They behave shamefully. It happens. Holding girls, and only girls responsible, moves justice from being blind to being blatantly sexist. When justice can only see one sex as guilty, it’s time to put out her eyes again.
In what world do you think this would happen? Show me the girls in jail for this kind of behavior.
Does.
Not.
Happen.
Justice? I don’t think so. More like bullshit.
Lots of love,
JB
judgybitch 
Sorry, JB. This allegory falls flat. If indeed a team of cheerleaders/sorority sisters/psychotically adolescent-fixated nymphomaniacs/transvestites took and exchanged online images of themselves or others frigging a 16 year old guy to erection and/or violating his ass, I’d be pretty damned upset. My oldest just reached teenhood and I’d hunt down those bitches and kill them (smartly, I have a pretty sound background in forensic chemistry).
This would, however, be incredibly unlikely to happen for the same reason you’d seldom see a teenaged girl photographed placing a bottle rocket up her as and posting it on the internet for fun (or think Jackass was cool).
Just sayin’.
LikeLike
But if it DID happen, Liz, can you imagine for one second that those girls would be punished with jail time? Would they be listed on the Sex Offenders Registry?
This isn’t about rape/not rape. It’s about the punishment being out of all proportion to the crime.
LikeLike
I don’t know what the punishment would be in said case, and I’m certain you’re probably right about the jail time and sex offenders list. There’s a large debate in the background here, which neither of us probably have the time to invest in, regarding societies and how punishments are determined for different behaviors.
Punishments are usually determined by the cost to gains equation….which would include variables like the liklihood it would happen (aka the deterence factor for the rest of the masses) versus harm placed on the victim versus actual punishment for the culprit.
LikeLike
Touche! I love reciprocity. Read this and then try a gender-flip. (note the typical comment and that it is categorized in the “News of the Weird” section.)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/13/man-flees-after-too-much-sex_n_1423530.html?view=screen
LikeLike
Wow. Normally I agree with your take on topics, JB, but on this one, not so much.
Rape is nonconsensual sexual relations. A sleeping/unconscious person, regardless of how they got that way, can’t consent. So by law (in most states, not just that one) he was raped.
Was he *forcibly* raped? No. But he was raped.
If a stranger walks up to me, punches me once in the jaw, and runs away, that’s assault. But by your analogy, I would be a jackass if I pressed charges because there are folks out there who get beaten to within an inch of their lives. Sure, me getting a single lick and a wife getting the full Tyson are two whole different levels of assault (a 2 vs. a 10 on the beatdown scale) but they’re both assault.
Just like the case above *is* rape. It’s just a fairly minor one. I’d put it on the misdemeanor level. I’d even argue, as the judge, that he went there for sex; he just wasn’t conscious when he received it, and so no rape. I wouldn’t hit those girls with a felony.
But the whole sex offender system is the whack part. Until THAT is fixed, yeah, the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. But anything other than their getting dinged for at least misdemeanor rape means THEY didn’t get charged hard enough, either.
It’s a no-win situation.
LikeLike
David,
If you got drunk and walked up to some guy and called him a fag and then got punched, I would hold you partly responsible for that assault.
LikeLike
And again, the question is not “was this rape” but “is this punishment out of all proportion”?
I say yes. Way out of proportion.
LikeLike
Ok, so this story didn’t happen, but is to illustrate a point?
I do get the point….just didn’t see the story on the CNN linked site
LikeLike
JB offered a hypothetical.
LikeLike
I’d compare it to the cheerleaders sticking something up his ass instead, but either option, and the option the boys actually did, should be punished as sexual assault.
Sexual assault should not be punished the same as rape, but should be punished.
As others have mentioned, the sex offender registry is a complete mess and puts crimes which result in addition to it into a whole new mess of a category. I wouldn’t add these people to a registry since they are kids who made one stupid mistake, though a second offence even of a similar not-fully-rape level would show a pattern and I’d put them on it then.
I hold everyone responsible for everything they do when willingly drunk. The fact is, the girl made some stupid choices, but she didn’t hurt anyone else. The boys did, and that’s why their punishment is legal, while hers is merely social (‘how could you be so stupid?’)
As for their promising futures, I don’t have any problem with punishing teens for doing majorly stupid things and holding it up to other teens as a demonstration that you really can ruin your entire future by stupidly getting drunk and doing one stupid thing.
When Vancouver rioted after the Stanley cup recently, a young man with a university scholarship and on a national sports team or something was captured in multiple photos destroying things with abandon, and was identified and prosecuted. He lost his spot on the team, his scholarship, and everything else he’d no doubt worked for for years.
Teens *should* understand that getting drunk is a dangerous thing, and they will be held responsible for their actions. Adults too.
Other than the mess of the sex offender registry, I have no problem with the punishment these men received. It should be equally applied to women in similar situations, but I don’t have a problem with the punishment itself.
LikeLike
I know some places once had a ‘fighting words’ law on the books, in which sufficient enticement could be used to justify an assault.
But there is a difference between calling someone names and deliberately enraging them, and simply existing as a young attractive female with no ability to defend oneself.
LikeLike
Nicely rephrased.
If only we could teach children in schools to reverse the genders in any sentence weighing up the opposite sex, to see whether it still is funny, or cruel, or unjust, or outrageously offensive. It would go some way towards bringing about that long-promised equality.
LikeLike
I see….nice photo liz……..I like your , um, energy….
LikeLike
You dont even need hypocriticals like this. Just look at real examples of hoe male vs female teachers have been treated for taking advantage of students. Hell, I remember a case where a male teacher who waited until a student graduated and was legal got more shit said about him than a female teacher who took minors and had orgies with them.
LikeLike
“incredibly unlikely”?…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-478781/Sick-happy-slap-girl-gang-sexually-abused-teenage-boy-jailed.html
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=053_1307989691
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/04/11/girls-accused-of-sexual-attack-on-boy-17/
http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2012/02/sisters-torture-teen-with-pliers-and-force-him-to-drink-urine-after-he-refuses-to-have-sex/
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/58495/Girls-caged-for-boy-torture.html
http://news.msn.co.nz/article/7924628/teen-girls-torture-man-with-vacuum-cleaner
LikeLike
A couple decades ago domestic violence laws were passed making arrest of the perp mandatory. Feminists celebrated. At the time we had a national following. We warned the nation that the law would bite the feminists in the butt because it would result in the arrest of at least as many women as men. Feminists scoffed…until it came true. The feminists went back to demand the law be rewritten to change from mandatory arrest of the perp, to mandatory arrest of the man. That made the feminists happy for a while. But hate mongers are never happy for long. I bring this up because it relates to the comparison you make between the molestation of the young man and rape. This kind of nonsense is a direct consequence of the feminist hate mongers’ extremism. First it primarily ruins men’s lives, then the target of their extremism expands to include women. Ideologues have little capacity for nuance or tolerance for shades of gray, but a great capacity for creating unintended consequence. The answer is to for feminists to stop being stupid hatemongers and join the rest of us in Liberty. Thanks for your great blog posts, several of which I link to my main site. I look forward to your next video.
LikeLike
This is great, this is totally what would happen – as long as there wasn’t another case of a drunken rape right before it, people would totally be like “oh boohoo, what about girls who get BRUTALLY RAPED”
LikeLike
Well done twist on the usual approach to this sort of news item. A similar one I find worth passing around: http://www.glennsacks.com/shouldnt_men_have.htm :
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Shouldn’t Men Have a Choice, Too?
By Glenn Sacks
Jennifer was crushed when she was told that a baby was on the way. She wants to have children, but the right way–after she has found the right person and is married. But in Jennifer’s country, she has no choice. “Jenn” cannot give the child up for adoption, and she cannot terminate the pregnancy. It is her burden to bear, for the next two decades, like it or not.
What country is it which compels a person to have a child they don’t want? Afghanistan? Saudi Arabia?
No, it’s the United States–not for Jenn, but for Ken.
Ken Johnson, a 10 year veteran of the Seattle Fire Department, wanted to be a father, but with the right woman, and at the right time. Three years ago he and his wife separated after six years of marriage, and each began to date. During this time, according to court documents filed in Snohomish County, Washington, Ken had a brief affair with “Cathy,” which resulted in a pregnancy. Ken’s legal complaint alleges that he begged Cathy to put the child up for adoption or to terminate the pregnancy, but Cathy refused. Now Ken and his wife, who reconciled two and a half years ago, can’t start a family of their own because almost half of Ken’s net income from the Seattle Fire Department goes to support the child he didn’t want to have. He says:
“People tell me that Cathy should have the choice whether to keep the child or not because it’s her body so it’s her choice. I agree. But what about my body? I make my living rushing into burning buildings. I put my life and my safety on the line every time I go to work, and now I’m on the hook for 18 years. With the child support demands on me, there’s no way I’ll ever be able to quit. What about my choice?”
Johnson is part of a growing movement of men who bristle at being “coerced fathers,” and who have enlisted in a “Choice for Men” movement whose goals are every bit as legitimate as the goals of the women’s reproductive rights movement. They note that one million American women legally walk away from motherhood every year by either adoption, abortion, or abandonment, and demand that men, like women, be given reproductive options. They point out that, unlike women, men have no reliable contraception available to them, since the failure rate of condoms is substantial, and vasectomies are generally only worthwhile for older men who have already married and had children. And they emphasize that, with long backlogs of stable, two-parent families looking for babies to adopt, there is no reason for any child born out of wedlock to a “coerced father” to be without a good home.
The Choice for Men movement seeks to give “coerced fathers” the right to relinquish their parental rights and responsibilities within a month of learning of a pregnancy, just as mothers do when they choose to give their children up for adoption. These men would be obligated to provide legitimate financial compensation to cover natal medical expenses, the mother’s loss of income during pregnancy, etc. The right would only apply to pregnancies which occurred outside of marriage.
Some of those who fought for women’s reproductive choices agree with choice for men. Karen DeCrow, former president of the National Organization for Women, writes:
“If a woman makes a unilateral decision to bring a pregnancy to term, and the biological father does not, and cannot, share in this decision, he should not be liable for 21 years of support … autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice.”
To date, courts have refused to consider fathers’ reproductive rights even in the most extreme cases, including: when child support is demanded from men who were as young as 12 when they were statutorily raped by older women; when women have taken the semen from a used condom and inserted it in themselves, including from condoms used only in oral sex; and when women concealed the pregnancy from the man (denying him the right to be a father) and then sued for back and current child support eight or ten years later.
“It doesn’t make sense to me,” Ken’s wife Patti says. “The courts force my husband and I to support a child he never agreed to, but make it financially impossible for him to have a child with the woman he loves and married.”
LikeLike
Bullshit! I want to get married and have children eventually with the right man as well. So what do I do in the mean time? I PROTECT myself, regardless of anything or anyone. I PROTECT MYSELF. I have a plan for my future that does NOT include having children out of wedlock and/or for the wrong man.
It is MY responsibility to protect MYSELF. Men should feel the same way if they are so worried about their choices and financial security. PROTECT YOURSELF. Regardless of gender, take some damn responsibility.
Ken would not be in that situation if he used a rubber. “Well rubbers break, blah blah blah” The majority of unwanted pregnancies does not occur because of broken rubbers. Stop depending on other human beings to protect you. Make shit happen for yourself.
LikeLike
Yeah, I have to agree with the dissenters on this one.
You can’t consent if you’re blitzed out of your mind. The football players deserved a decent punishment.
That said, you raise a valid point that if the sexes were reversed there would be little uproar. In fact, I’d think a common take would be, “That guy acted like a total idiot and he still scored with some cute girls. Lucky guy!”
My take away is that female on male sexual assault should be taken more seriously than it is, not that these football players were punished excessively.
LikeLike
“What country is it which compels a person to have a child they don’t want? ”
Ireland.
Read here;
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/14/savita-halappanavar-death-irish-woman-denied-abortion-dies_n_2128696.html
LikeLike
What country compels a person to have a child they don’t want?
The United States.
But only if you are a man.
http://judgybitch.com/2013/01/27/mandatory-reproduction-we-already-have-that-for-men/
LikeLike