Columns May 4, 2011 at 4:00 am

The Ex Files

Comments

103
I think the Savage Love community needs to coin an alternative word for gay, whose first google result will lead to a page with all the information queer youth in Tennessee and elsewhere might ever need.
104
#102, Dan goes right out and states that he thinks the woman should give the man a chance to 'make a case' to not have an abortion, if he thinks she is making a 'mistake'. I don't think Dan (or a lot of people commenting here) realize what a paternalistic attitude this is.
Dan straight out says he thinks the fetus somehow belongs to the man also. He seems to think women should set themselves up to be guilted/ bullied/ or otherwise pressured into not having the abortion based on the fact that the man thinks it's a mistake. Because like you bring up, otherwise what does it matter if we REALLY accept that it is her body and her choice, and that the man doesn't have part ownership in her uterus now that there's a fetus in there that he helped make. And Dan (and others commenting here) also seem to be a fairytale world where there will be no negative consequences if the woman disclosed that she's having/ had an abortion and the man decides that he doesn't want it.
The same point of view that Dan seems to be upholding here is one of the main reasons it can easily become a bad situation for the woman. If we say that men have partial ownership of the fetus, and if the man is anti-choice (and plenty of guys who come off as 'good and decent' do indeed turn out to be against abortion), then what happens? Especially if we start considering the embryo/ fetus a 'baby'. The guy is going to look at it as the woman doing something with 'his baby' that he doesn't want done. At the very least the woman is setting herself up to be badgered and bullied, potentially emotionally blackmailed.

Dan should have realized that he is in a privileged position here, as a man who will never be pregnant, and he should have asked someone- hey, why not ask someone in NARAL, Dan?- who is more qualified to be offering an opinion on the subject.
105
@100 Wish I had your confidence that CL was an enthusiastic participant. Maybe she'll write in and tell us that she had a great time.
106
#27 and #50-
I can't find "flowersand" anywhere else on the internet. Unless I'm missing something, I'm going to assume it's some new nonsense word born of a typo (iphone perhaps?) and start saying it.

Last night my husband bought some bullshit "62% juice" instead of orange juice. Total flowersand
107
It kind of annoys me that people say the sex is bad just because he came quickly. Even if a guy comes quickly, sex can be great, if he eats her out, fingers her, rubs her clit, or waits to recharge.

What made the sex bad is that she wasn't enthusiastic about it, and that it doesn't sound like he cared enough to make it good for her.

@102: I'd want to know. That's all. I wouldn't want to change someone's mind or participate in the decision. I'd just like to know.
109
@ 107, that's not the right to be heard or to make a case to keep the child, though. That's the right to hear / be informed and can be exercised after the abortion has taken place. (But I still suspect that calling it a right is a little extreme...)
110
@109: Yeah, I don't think it's a right. I think Dan was talking more about the case where the woman might want to carry the pregnancy to term if the guy was really interested in raising the kid.
111
It sounds like what FOFS's ex needs to hear is that FOFS violated the principle that seems to underly all of Dan's advice, which is you can a) be slick in a relationship you make your first priority, or b) make a relationship something other than your first priority if you aren't slick in it, but you can't be slick in a relationship that isn't your first priority.

Being relationship-challenged isn't anything like raping someone. But if his account doesn't register with the relationship-challenged, then why should it even matter what the aggrieved party says?

I'd like to hear if FOFS went on record admitting she owed it to her ex to abide by the thinnest principle for maintaining a relationship with him, she failed him, and that her valid apology still wasn't enough for him.

Give him an email admitting she owes her fabulous relationship to the progress she made from the mistake she made with him, and tell him she's cutting him off because she doesn't have anything more to give him. Isn't betting on her good relationship all pluses and no minuses?
113
He not only has a right to know, but he also has a right to influence the girl's decision to abort or carry to term. This notion that it is the female's 100% undeniable right to decide based 100% on her own is just not right. The courts have made it pretty clear that if the baby is born, then the sperm owner will have to contribute financially until the child is an adult. Therefore, the owner of the sperm should have some rights on this big decision.
114
wow. Its pathetic straight chick drama day. snooze.
115
What, no third letter?
116
@113: If the sperm owner doesn't want to contribute financially, he should be more careful about where he leaves his sperm.

Her body, her choice.
117
Generally, I agree that speaking with the would-be father is the responsible thing to do, with the exemption of certain contexts, which you seem to take into consideration when you made the statement.

Over all, I do think women need to be upfront with their partners - especially long-term relations - about their feelings on having children. Whether you're likely to abort or keep it, and your reasons for either, he needs to know. It's only fair that he get a heads up if he has strong feelings about the issue. I realize that the obnoxiously polarized politicizing of the issue in this country make women reluctant to bring it up, but I honestly think both sides could be saved a lot of grief if they were on the same level going into the situation.

As for the men in this situation, I would ask that you please be very certain you want the responsibility if you really want her to keep it. There are no backsies on babies.
118
C.L. only has the obligation to reveal medical information to her fling if she has some sort of a trusting relationship with her sexual "partner." If a fling treats somebody like a "pump and dump" she has no obligation to tell him medical information that he could gossip to other people. That info. is private, and I wouldn't advise her to tell him unless he was a friend or someone she thought she could trust.

People don't get "rights" to personal medical information because of a brief fling that does not include friendship or trust. I think the legal obligation for child support has fucked us up as a society. It's insane to advise a woman (or a man) to trust a fling who has "run for the hills" with personal and private information. This guy doesn't even want to talk her anymore.

Dan has suggested physical or emotional abuse as only reason why she is not ethically required to reveal her plan to get an abortion. But this is way too low a bar to mandate an obligation to reveal medical information. Let's say she's in high school or a small college. This information could get her labeled as a slut and harassed.

Why should a teenager or a young woman be under an automatic obligation to any Tom, Dick or Harry who has refused to talk to her after a one-thrust pump and dump?

She only has an obligation if she is going to bear his child. But if she has a miscarriage after 6 weeks? If she takes the morning-after pill because she skipped her B.C.? If she aborts the embryo or fetus at 8 weeks? She should only tell him if she trusts him not to hurt her with the information. She doesn't have an obligation to tell him unless they are friends.
119
Re CL: As far as the question of whether a woman should hear a man out before having an abortion, personally I think it depends on the kind of relationship they have, or don't have. A long - term partner certainly should be told (can't imagine keeping a secret like that from someone unless you're being abused, in which case GTFO of there), and perhaps someone who is a friend with benefits also should be told. But a one night stand who is no longer speaking to you? I see no reason to inform that person at all.
Re FOFS: your former BF is a psycho. Keeping in touch with him will not help at all. DTMFA!
120
C-chic said: "Whether you're likely to abort or keep it, and your reasons for either, he needs to know. It's only fair that he get a heads up if he has strong feelings about the issue."

I just don't see it unless they have an actual relationship. Some people have very strong feelings about the morning after pill. They think it's murder. Does she have an obligation to contact her pump and dump fling before she gets the morning after pill? What if she discovered that her anti-biotics that she's taking for acne make it likely that her b.c. isn't working. Does her fling have a right to know and a right to persuade her not to take the morning after pill?

And how does she track this fling down in time? Seeing as he doesn't even want to talk to her?

People owe people to the degree that they are actually involved in a trusting relationships. Prostitutes don't owe johns. Random strangers fucking in bathrooms don't owe each other anything. Flings don't owe flings, particularly when they have no relationship and don't talk to each other. And people who aren't trustworthy aren't owed information that can be hurtful. There's a reason medical information is legally private.
121
I hope Dan will do a whole column on defining rape. His readers surely will not all agree that he's right, but at least we can avoid comments like we got this week where we'll all discussing situations when we don't know what the terms are that we're disagreeing with.

I see a few issues. One is whether something can be rape if there's consent at the moment but rape is brought up retroactively when it turns out one has consented under false assumptions. Like, I thought I'd have a good time, but he came after one thrust, or I consented because I thought we'd spend the rest of our lives together, but she broke up with me. Also, I consented, but that was when I thought she'd have an abortion; now that she won't, I think she raped me, or I consented, but that was when I thought she wouldn't have an abortion. I take a hard line view. I don't even think it's rape when a jerk feeds her a pack of lies, gets her consent, then brags to his frat buddies in the morning. But that's me. (I'm straight and female, consider myself a feminist, and have disagreed with friends over this issue.)

The next issue is what constitutes consent at the moment. Again, I take the hard line view. I think there should be some effort to say no and make it stick. Just saying nothing can happen before beginning a make-out session isn't enough, not when there have been a hundred contradictions between that statement and penetration. If it began with "we can make-out, but no penetration, 'k?" that's different. With that, there's definition and negotiation.

I'd also appreciate some education from Dan on the circumstances in which women rape men. If he didn't want to put his dick inside her, wouldn't he fight her off and get out of there? If she was stronger than he and overpowering him, wouldn't he go soft? If she fed him that pack of lies or blackmailed or coerced him, wouldn't we call that sexual coercion, not rape?
122
Both the letter-writers are drama queens who had relations with assholes and are now keeping the drama going. All the rest is just white noise. Cut off contact with the guys, deal with your own issues.
124
@121 Crinoline

Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I agree with you about the distinction between rape and just behaving badly. There is a presumption of lying when sex is under consideration. One would be wise to take a guilty until proven innocent approach with new partners if one cares about more than just a one night stand.

"If she was stronger than he and overpowering him, wouldn't he go soft?"

No. The spine not the brain is responsible for the erection. The mind can get in the way but in general men can be forced to have an erection just by stimulating the penis. Men have been raped by women this way. Teenagers are plagued by unwanted erections. There is a reason for the cliche that "it has a mind of its own."
125
This whole, "My body my choice" thing is great, and all. But lets be serious. Yes, if I get pregnant it is ultimately my decision to keep the baby or not. No man can force me to keep it, but why not let him have an opinion on the matter.
I have more male friends than female friends (because while I'm all for strong women, feminazis piss me off). I have seen situations in which men were "stuck with" the one time mistake they made.
I have also seen situations in which women chose abortion, and watched the man go through depression over the death of his child. Saying that its not part of him is ridiculous. Yes, it's in the females body (which is why it's ultimately her decision), but it is not "part" of her body, it is inside of and attached to her body. Half of the dna is his. Possession is 9/10 of the law, but doesn't that mean he should get 1/10 consideration?
I've also seen situations where a woman didn't want to raise a child, but happened to get pregnant. The father WANTED to be a father, so she had the baby and signed parental rights to him. There are multiple options in these scenarios, and none are more right or wrong than the others.
No, if I got pregnant from a one night stand and decided not to keep it, I probably wouldn't let them know. But if it was a FWB situation, how could you care so little about the other person that you wouldn't want to at least know their opinion? Personally, I find it incredibly difficult to sleep with someone I don't care for at least in a friend sense, so to not even ask their thoughts seems to be an asshole move on my part.
126
@125 KateRose

Of course you have options and in many cases you might well speak to the man before choosing what to do. But for me at least, the issue in this letter is the question of the man's rights. So in that sense I am saying that he has no right to be informed or to force the woman to hear his opinions. That's not "ridiculous." Even you say that you wouldn't tell him in every circumstance, which is what a "right" would demand.

It's too bad that you know guys who mourned "the death of his child." A fetus is not a child to many people. A child exists only after being born. If these guys want kids then they can go have them in the usual way. It happens all the time. But men need to do it with women who are equally committed to having babies with them. And they need to jealously guard their sperm if they think abortion is infanticide.
127
@ 125, you say "why not let him have an opinion on the matter", but what does that actually mean? Are you suggesting that no woman can be sure whether she wants to keep the pregnancy or terminate it, so talking to the baby's father can somehow influence her decision?

What if the woman is sure that there's no way in hell she's having that baby (for whatever reason)? Why would she need to hear his opinion when it's not going to make a difference at all? She may choose to INFORM him about her decision (before or after abortion, doesn't matter) but why on earth would she ASK him for his input when she's going to have that abortion no matter what?

Or are you saying that no woman should be sure she doesn't want to keep the pregnancy before hearing the man's opinion? Because that's unlikely to work, people want what they want, I am sure there are things you know you don't want in life no matter what everybody else thinks about it.
128
@107

Quickies can for sure be amazing! But if someone comes in you IMMEDIATELY? In one thrust? That's not even sex, in my book, that's some kind of other event that should have it's own name.

Dan?
129
@105 EricaP please point me to what I wrote that lead you to the conclusion that I am certain CL was an enthusiastic participant.

Because I feel like I've been championing doubt this whole time.
130
@80, @87

Look, as a woman I understand how important it is that I be able to choose, and that's an implicit right—someone might obstruct that right, but it is not something that can be removed. That being said, I don't see the need to view men so harshly. Yes, of course there are millions of men who are complete and total assholes, and I've had the misfortune to known some of them. But, I have to say I resent it when people choose to judge women by the worst of us, and I don't want to do the same to men. And we are talking about social courtesies rather than legal rights, or at least I am. A woman can choose to keep the news a pregnancy to herself, and there are often very good reasons to do so. But Dan is right, it is a good thing for a man to know that there have been consequences for his actions. I think it's a mistake to be too black-and-white on this issue, and to claim that since a zygote/embryo/fetus is part of a woman's body it is somehow entirely removed from the man who helped to make it. To say that he's responsible for the fucking and he's responsible if a child results from the pregnancy, but he is unconnected with the interval doesn't make much sense. A woman has the sole deciding voice with respect to the pregnancy, but the clump of cells inside her is made with two sets of DNA. The woman has the power to choose if the man knows of the pregnancy or not, it's her decision—but in a lot of cases, the decent thing is to tell the guy. You can say that I have an unrealistic view of men, but I don't—I just acknowledge that they're individuals the same as us, and that the merits of their case should be decided on that basis, and a lot of guys deserve to know.
131
What Dan says makes sense to me in theory, but I know if I got pregnant from a one night stand, I'd get an abortion without telling the guy -- and possibly without telling anyone. I'd go into self-preservation mode, that's just me. Then again, this is why I don't have one night stands and don't have sex with anyone I don't really trust.
132
#125, why not let him have an opinion on it? You actually brought up a good reason in your comment- some people can't see the difference between a 4" long clumpy little fetus (roughly the size they are when the majority of abortions occur), and a living human baby- one you can hold and interact with as a separate little person. Now, if a woman wants an abortion and the man who got her pregnant is one of those people, do you think he's going to just say, "Well, I don't like that for these reasons but of course it's ultimately your body and your choice"? Or do you think he's going to do whatever he can to keep her from "murdering 'his baby'"? I'm not even talking about violence or any illegal actions- rather emotional abuse, threatening to tell her friends and family if he thinks they will shun her for her choice. Or, as you seem to be against abortion rights, do you think that being subjected to potential harassment/ abuse is a suitable 'punishment' for women who would dare to even consider an abortion?

Quite frankly I'm horrified that you say, "Possession is 9/10 of the law, but doesn't that mean he should get 1/10 consideration?" NO. He doesn't even get 1/100 of a vote in what happens to her body. If you think he has some partial legal right to the fetus, fine- once she has it aborted, why not give it to him? But that isn't what you mean, is it? Because of course without the woman's body, the fetus isn't anything but a clumpy lump that's just barely starting to look human. So my question is, do you think that if a man impregnates a woman it means he should have even 1/ 10 of a control in HER BODY? Do you think I'm a "feminazi" for thinking that he doesn't?
133
nobody has yet to say what a SH*T thing it is to do , to tell somebody you are on birth control when you ARE NOT, sure the guy was a FOOL for not wearing a condom, but shouldnt she be told TO GROW UP? that her behavior has UNACCEPTABLE? and if you lie about being on birth control and get pregnant you deserve whatever you get, and the guy has a right to be PISSED OFF, if you are pregnant or even if you SCARE him
134
@130 chicago girl

I agree with just about everything you said. I don't think the man is ever unconnected to the fetus, I just think that we need to be extremely sensitive to the fact that a pregnancy is actually an interval that doesn't require his opinion. I'm concerned with it being his "right" in all cases to be informed and heard. Yes, it's probably true that most of the time it's just the decent thing to involve him. But the letter writer specifically asked about it being a man's right.
135
#130, I'm really not judging men here- I'd be willing to guess that a good percentage, even the majority of men, wouldn't even become emotionally abusive if they found out the woman they were with planned on aborting 'their fetus'.
I just think that women are under no obligation to disclose it in the name of 'fairness'- mainly because by disclosing that bit of private information, there is a far greater risk to her than there is to the man. In a society where abortion rights are constantly being challenged and chipped away at, and where abortion (and female sexuality in general) is looked down upon, you can really fuck up someone's life if you want to spread it around that they've had an abortion.
I've known a couple women who let their partners know that they wanted an abortion, when the men didn't approve of it, and they were subjected to guilt trips and emotional blackmail. One's boyfriend DID go to her family and together with her mother and sisters successfully shamed her into keeping a pregnancy she didn't want. Now he's nowhere to be seen, and she dumps the unwanted kid on whatever family member will watch it. The other just got into screaming fights over it with her fiance, as he constantly tried to talk her out of it. They broke up and she got the abortion, but she was subjected to terrible stress and harassment at a time when she shouldn't have been.

Something you may want to look into also is pregnancy-associated homicide. Again, this isn't to criticize men and imply that they're all monsters who shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt, but there IS an increased risk to women who are exercising their reproductive rights one way or the other.

The right to privacy regarding one's own medical/ reproductive choices is FAR MORE IMPORTANT than 'social courtesies'. I don't think we as women should be told that being 'fair' is more important than that.
136
"I take a hard line view. I don't even think it's rape when a jerk feeds her a pack of lies, gets her consent, then brags to his frat buddies in the morning. But that's me. (I'm straight and female, consider myself a feminist, and have disagreed with friends over this issue.)"

That's a hard line view, among your friends?

Thank fucking god your friends are not in charge of a damn thing. /fingers crossed
137
@129 Apologies if I misunderstood. You wrote @100 "Once she starts making out with him... she has already changed her mind."

I thought you meant that if she wanted him, physically (which clearly she did, since the only reason they weren't having sex before was that he was in a relationship), and she started to make out with him, then she no longer cares that he is in a relationship and she now can be assumed to actively want sex with him.

I think most women make a huge distinction between a make-out session and intercourse. One doesn't involve the risks of STDs, pregnancy, and being called a slut; the other does. I don't think she ever changed her mind about having intercourse with him. He made the decision for her, by penetrating her before she even realized what he was up to. You suggested he had every right to assume she was fine with it; I think he should have known better but pressed his advantage when she wasn't thinking clearly.
138
Crinoline @121 - rape isn't the issue. No one says she said no, or that he could be brought up on charges.

The question is: was he ethically justified in penetrating her right after asking if she was on BC, or was that a shitty thing to do.

It's about ethics, not the law.
139
@133 sherrydarling - Reading comprehension FAIL.

CL: "I told him yes, because I was."

She told the truth; she was on BC, but sherrydarling, that doesn't always magically stop a baby from forming. In her case, she wasn't pregnant. But you can still get pregnant while using BC - and any guy who is concerned about that should use condoms as well as whatever BC she is on.
140
Sherry, Darling (#133), she never said she wasn't on birth control. Birth control, like condoms, are not magical fairies that protect you 100 percent. And pregnancy scares are not pregnancies, and thus can happen even when the birth control is working properly. That being said, yes, lying about being on the pill is a shitty thing to do, and I believe that was actually mentioned in one of the very first comments.

When it comes to telling or not telling, my stance on the matter is that it's vastly more important to tell if you plan to keep the baby. If the woman wants an abortion, however, it's really down to what relationship I have with her. If a random lay I had got an abortion afterwards, I wouldn't really feel the need to know. If a friend with benefits did, I would, and if my girlfriend had one, I'd feel betrayed if she didn't.

And I'd like to argue that it's important to include the father of the child in the discussion about keeping it if you're thinking of keeping it, no matter what your relations are (obviously not including rape, etc). He is the father of the potential child, and just going ahead without asking his opinion is likely to cause bad blood and resentment, which could spill onto the child. If the father is included in the decision, allowed to discuss and say what he thinks (and also given the opportunity to hear why you want to keep the child), I suspect it might help the relationship between the coming child and the father. That is, involve him as early as possible, and he'll be more likely to be a good force in your childs life.
141
Rape???? Really???? OMG, the feminazis strike again *roll-eyes* Really, womyn, overuse of this word is derogatory and trivializes the experiences of *actual* rape victims. This was crappy ass sex. And yes, while quickies can be enjoyable, there is no way I would find ONE THRUST enjoyable! That doesn't even qualify as a quckie.

Mark this day down again, I agree with Hunter 100%, wow! Thats like twice in a row, right?

Men have a responsibility not to rape us, lol. But at some point, we as women, if we do not want it, have a responsibility to SAY FREAKING NO!!! And the guys need to respect that (barring any roofies of course, that is not playing fair...and of course, and other threats, intimidation, ect). The woman being drunk, whatever...well, if a guy got drunk and RAPED you, it would still be rape right? So if a woman gets drunk and gives her consent, its still consent! Abusing alcohol does not absolve one of personal responsibility. Otherwise we would not arrest people for killing others for drunk driving.

And ITA with those speaking about telling about an abortion being depandant on the relationship status. I would definitely tell a long term lover, or someone I was in a relationship with. I am a feminist, not a feminazi...I would like the man I was in a relationship with to help me with that decision, as it would impact both of our lives. However, a quickie back seat, one pump chump when I have already made up my mind? There would be no point in telling about the abortion other then the guilt trip, unless I needed the money. Then I might ask him for half.
142
There is only one person CL needs to tell about her pregnancy scare: the woman that the one-thrust-wonder is actually in a relationship with.
143
Wow @127, you've put so many words in my mouth that I feel violated.
No I don't believe it's impossible for a woman to make a decision without a man's input. That's ridiculous. But just like in any decision I make, it affects other people. Yes (I'll say it again), in the end it is MY decision. But why are the only options to raise the baby or have an abortion. Yes, I'm pro-choice, but I think the more choices you allow yourself the better off you are. I would want to know if the man wanted the opportunity to raise his child, because I would seriously consider carrying the child to term, then leaving it in it's father's care. It's not a man's fault that he can't carry a child on his own. As long as you're dealing with a man who you know isn't going to threaten your well being, why not ask their opinion. Even when I "know" what I want, I ask outside opinions. You never know what perspective you may have after getting the opinion.
Maybe it's not a man's right to know, but I think it's pretty shitty not to give him the chance to at least know that he potentially fathered a child.
I don't understand why being a feminist seems to mean that we need to call men dogs who want to own us and our uterus... You can be strong without being a bitch. If you hate men that much, why sleep with them? And if you don't sleep with them, this is a moot point for you.
144
Badgirl, in the same way that people can get behind the wheel of a car or bust out a window when they are drunk and irrational, so too can people sexually penetrate others when they are drunk. However, the very idea of consent-to-sex requires that one is mentally capable of doing so, in a way that might be impaired severely by alcohol, sleep, drugs, or other things. The law also needs to treat these things differently because in many states, meeting the standard of sexual assault requires active resistance, while the drunk person might not be capable of this even if not giving consent, either.

If you don't grasp these basics, maybe you should stop using annoying terms like "womyn", or trying to decide who's a feminist and who's a feminazi.
145
"the fetus, if not the uterus - is his too"

Seriously, Dan? I can understand the fetus part, but my uterus is MINE. I don't care who the fuck's sperm wiggled inside it. If I had a Christmas card list I would kick you off it too.
146
Chicago girl, this makes perfect sense to me: "The woman has the power to choose if the man knows of the pregnancy or not, it's her decision—but in a lot of cases, the decent thing is to tell the guy."

Thanks to anatomical differences, and the complexities and sometimes violence of the situations under which we have sex or conceive children, it's the woman's choice whether to disclose this to the man, and she isn't always morally obligated to make that choice. But, as you say, in a lot of cases it is the decent thing to do.

It's also helpful because you might uncover information that influences some very important decisions. Maybe the man is truly interested in being a parent and would be a wonderful one. Maybe he or his family behave badly in response, thus making it very clear that the woman should leave them out of it. These are things I'd like to know before deciding about a pregnancy.
147
@137
"You suggested he had every right to assume she was fine with it;"

I did not. I suggested that he had every right to consider her openness to PIV sex an unknown. He may have had every right to assume she was fine with it. We have no way of making that call. She didn't include the information we would need to make that call, probably because it has no bearing on her question.

"He made the decision for her, by penetrating her before she even realized what he was up to."

For this version of events to make sense, you have to assume she still had her underwear on. This also requires her to have not understood why he asked her if she was on birth control. Given the context, that's a very difficult assumption to make. Harder still is assuming that he knew she was so oblivious.
148
FOFS, your obsession with hanging on to exes is weird, and can't simply be attributed to the untimely death of someone you once loved. You are also behaving abominably towards your current, good boyfriend, by entertaining anything your crazy ex has to say.

But, that said, your crazy ex is crazy, completely crazy, get as far away from this nutjob as possible crazy. He accuses you of rape because of... false pretenses that the relationship would work? Seriously, you need to never speak to this person again, ever. If therapy might help you figure out why you feel the need to bother, then go for it.
149
@147 - all depends on how drunk she was, and how much time he gave her to process the BC question, before inserting his penis. Maybe you haven't had unwelcome sex pushed on you. It happens quickly.

I'm asking guys to consider, along with their hunger for sex, whether it is likely that she will regret it in the morning. Legally, they don't have to consider that. But ethically, they should.
150
Oy vey Suzy...just as a person who initially TAKES the drink and steps behind the wheel and kills someone needs to be held responsibility for their actions (you do understand that don't you? I wouldn't think *even you* would argue with that would you?), so should the WOMAN who makes the choice to drink...if she is old enough and mature enough to imbibe alcohol and drugs and be in a mixed gender setting, SHE should be old enough and mature enough to understand the risks this entails. If she gives her consent, then she GIVES HER CONSENT. If a guy takes advantage, it might make him a douche, but it does NOT make him a rapist. (I am talking about if she is still conscious of course; I know the stupid arguement about a passed out girl is coming next, I am talking about using alcohol to lower inhibitions, LIKE in the letter)

Are men now required to carry breathlyers on their dates now, in addition to getting written consent forms to satisfy you "womyn feminazis", a term that I use to describe man-hating, frigid, scary ass bitches who seem to be all over this weeks comments. How in the hell else are they supposed to determine exactly how messed up their dates are? I, for one, carry my booze pretty damned well, I can be pretty fucked up, and a person might not be able to tell. Whereas other women might have half a glass of wine, and and act all loopy and obviously impared. I would certainly never cry "rape" if *I* made the mistake of getting 'faced, having my inhibitions drastically lowered and going out and ill-advisedly fucking someone, and then regretting it in the morning. That is NOT rape, that is MY POOR CHOICES. WTF ever happened to personal responsibilty in this country? You feminiazis would *certainly* not let a drunk RAPIST off the hook because he was mentally impared by drugs, alcohol, lack of sleep, or any of the other bunk ass reasons you list, I can guaruntee you that...

Jesus, no wonder some guys have an issue with man-hating women....I had never met too many until I started reading these comments. Holy hell, some *angry* ass womyn out there, lol!
151
@150 I don't get much opportunity to comment on these boards, but I must say, the more I read of you, the more I like you. I agree, too many women are more worried about putting the blame on others instead of admitting where they messed up. If I went by the definitions of rape that I've heard over and over, most of my sexual encounters have been rape, and I've been a rapist. There has to come a point where you need to be ok with the fact that you messed up, own up to it, and move on.
152
Badgirl, I think you're reacting a bit emotionally to Suzy and the others there. In principle I agree with you -- a person who decides to drink and, because of that, does something stupid does have to face the fact that s/he could have chosen not to drink and therefore avoid making stupid choices under the influence with bad consequences for him/herself and/or others. I agree 100% with that.

But let's not forget that there is another person involved -- the man who took advantage of that woman's stupid choice of drinking more than she should have. What exactly is his status? You say he's a douche, but not a rapist. I'm inclined to agree with you; but then...

Let's say the man in question had not had sex with the drunk woman, but stolen her money. Would that be theft -- or should we say the man is not a thief, because after all the woman did make the poor choice of drinking in that place at that time.

Would it make a difference if she asked her (in her imbibed state) "can I take your money?" and she said "yeah..."?

Would it be the different if she took the money first, then said to her "I took your money! OK?" and she made some little gesture that someone might still plausible interpret as agreeing?

Would it be different if he took her money right in front of her, in full view, and put it in his pocket, while she looked and did nothing? Could this be "implied consent", i.e. he wasn't stealing, he was "borrowing"?

In other words, badgirl: I think the others here are concerned with the evil intentions of the guy in question, and whether or not he should be punished for taking advantage of drunk people. You're concerned with the fact that drunk people also have responsibilities: they shouldn't get drunk in a place where this is a bad idea. Advice valid for men and women.

I think the two sides here are simply approaching the gray area from different directions and extending their understanding of the 'clear cases' into the unclear ones as well.

Having said that... I am sympathetic to your position. I do think that people who get drunk should know and accept responsibility for the fact that they may be submitting themselves to ridiculous and/or potentially dangerous situations. The law accepts this fact with drunk driving (since the consequences can be so horrible: killing someone); it probably should also in cases where the consequences are less horrible.
153
@151 "If I went by the definitions of rape that I've heard over and over, most of my sexual encounters have been rape, and I've been a rapist."

What are these ridiculous definitions of rape that you've heard over and over? Care to give an example?
154
@152 (and others): "I think the others here are concerned with the evil intentions of the guy in question, and whether or not he should be punished for taking advantage of drunk people. You're concerned with the fact that drunk people also have responsibilities: they shouldn't get drunk in a place where this is a bad idea. Advice valid for men and women."

What I am finding interesting is an implicit assumption in several posts here that he was not drunk too. People are prepared to say that she has some diminished responsibility for her decision to get physical with this guy, and that he should have been more careful regarding her consent because of that. But his judgement may have been just as impaired as hers.
155
ankylosaur, I get emotional because I grow weary of our culture of "victimhood" we have purpetuated in this society. Everyone these days seems to have a diagnosis of *something* (depression, bad childhood, ADHD, autism, bad hair days, whatever, EVERYTHING is on the rise!), which is fine, but when do we have to fucking sack up and take responsibility for our actions as adults?

And your instance of the stealing money...the only thing I see it comparable to is him asking to have some of her money and her agreeing, no subterfuge needed, because I interpreted the letter as her consent was given. She seemed eager enough for the action, as poor as it ended up being. This voids all your other scenarios, since she was a willing participant. And if he openly asked her for money when she was drunk, and she gave it to him, does that make him a thief? No it does not. It makes her foolish, and him a shithead.

And Backyard Bombardier makes an excellent point. I would hope he was messed up on something with that terrible outing, lol!

And lol KateRose, Thank you...thank you very much!
156
@135

I think where we're reaching an impasse is that I am only talking about informal, discretionary, varies-dramatically-from-person-to-person "rights," and you seem to think that I'm still putting a woman's right to privacy at risk. Nope, I am only talking about what happens between two people; it's not like I'm suggesting that there be laws that say a man must be informed of a pregnancy. Since the woman alone decides what happens to the pregnancy, why shouldn't the guy be allowed to say what he thinks? Your friend "was subjected to terrible stress and harassment at a time when she shouldn't have been," but wasn't that guy her boyfriend, and didn't she choose to tell him? We can't claim to have total rights over a pregnancy (which we do, and that never changes) while also forbidding others to even state their opinion on the matter, that's not how anything works. We don't have a right to have every person in our life treat us well all the time, and when relationships go sour can be horribly painful. I've had an issue with a pregnancy and an asshole guy, and it was awful, but we run the risk of this kind of pain when we have sex.
157
Dear Classy Lady: You had what amounts to a 1 night stand with a guy who was not in it or you for the outcome of pregnancy. IMHO, if you were about to have an abortion, you are not obliged to tell the 1 night stand guy that he dodged that bullet. What would you have said or done, had he freaked and asked you to forego the abortion? Did you even go down that road in your imagination? I guess not. You and you alone would be shouldering the weight of the pregnancy. You are the one who gets to say whether that 1 night stand would turn out to be a life-long relationship, all based on the results of that back seat boogy. Geesh - why would you sacrifice the rest of your life for someone who wasn't in it for the child in the first place? Don't look back, look forward, and be thankful that YOU dodged that bullet.
158
Chicago girl, the guy be allowed to say what he thinks if the woman decides to tell him. Of course. But if she doesn't want to tell him- for any reason- then it isn't that she's forbidding him to state his opinion. She's not silencing him in any way, she just isn't sharing her personal information with him. And yes, in an ideal world lovers would share personal information with each others, and there would be no bad results of sharing that information.
I could just as easily argue that every time men have sex they run the risk of facing the pain of not knowing whether or not the women they are with are getting abortions without informing them/ seeking their advice.
159
@153 "What are these ridiculous definitions of rape that you've heard over and over? Care to give an example? "
I went to a girls only high school. Not only that, it was a catholic school. Because they considered everything sexual dirty, they had someone come in and tell us what constituted rape. The woman practically told us that unless a man gets a signed, notarized permission slip, it is rape. There is such a thing as implied consent.
The one that I had the most difficulty with (and I ask that you please read my words and not read into them before I state this) was when she stated that, if you are naked in bed with a man, he has no reason whatsoever to believe she wants to have sex with them.
Now, before people start having conniptions, I don't believe that being naked in bed with someone is an expressed consent for sex. I do however believe that its not entirely unreasonable for someone to believe it might be in the cards at that point, if not expressly discussed beforehand.
As someone who considers themselves mature enough to become involved in any type of sexual encounter (from making out, to heavy petting to PIV) should also be mature enough to discuss their boundaries. For example, when I first started dating my current bf, I explained that I didn't want "sex" aka PIV right away, because I wanted to explore all of the other fun things we could do together. He was ok with it. Actually, I caved before he did. He was smart enough to buy condoms in case the opportunity arose, but kept them in a separate room so that we'd have to make a conscious decision to use them.
Based on the definition of rape as "no expressed consent" my first time was rape. I was in my boyfriends bed, we were fooling around and suddenly, we were having sex (albeit awful sex). He didn't ask before he entered me, and, while I wasn't expecting it at that specific second, I was expecting that it would be likely to happen.
It sort of falls under the "two sides to every story" idea. If a person is not direct in their expectations of a situation, it is possible to read into it that they want more than they actually do.
160
"the fetus, if not the uterus - is his too"

What is this? You poke it, you own it?

He does not OWN that zygote/embryo/fetus. The zygote/embryo is NOT his "too." Modernists think DNA=ownerhsip, but that's bullshit. He has rights if he's her domestic partner. Ethically he gets rights if he's her friend.

But a random back of the seat/ won't talk to her/ has another girlfiend and feels no friendship or social obligation towards this woman? Dan, what are you thinking? He could hurt her with this information.

For all of you who think any male has a right to be informed from a casual sexual interaction:

Let's say your 16 year-old daughter is knocked up at a frat party. How many of you think she has an obligation to inform the frat boy before she takes a morning after pill or takes an abortion pill?

How many of you will argue that an 17 year old high school boy should have a say if your teenage daughter keeps her pregnancy? Let's say this 17 year old is dating another girl and basically just pumped and dumped inside of your daughter.

Does he have a right to persuade her to keep it? Does he have a right to know that your daughter has gone to Planned Parenthood to take RU486? What about the morning after pill?

And if not, why not? Dan: this question is also for you.
161
I love it when the letter writers are so incredibly naive and clueless, but it does make the column a wee bit pointless to anyone with common sense.
162
@159, Your school did not say rape is when a man has sex without a "signed, notarized permission slip." That's your exaggeration. Your second example isn't a definition of rape. It's a disagreement about what a guy can reasonably expect when a mentally competent woman is NOT objecting. You and your prudish school would agree that once she starts objecting, that is when it becomes rape.

Finally, I think it makes sense to tell high school boys that a girl may be naked in bed with them and still not want sex. They should be aware of that possibility.

I would tell high school girls the corollary: If you are naked in bed with a guy, especially if you are drunk - you may find yourself having sex without ever having decided to. And you will have to face the consequences.
163
@154 asks why assume the guy wasn't wasted too.

He remembered to ask if she was on BC before pushing inside her. That's pretty clear thinking. Our evidence for her mental competence is that she was still able to understand and answer his question. That seems like a lower standard - passive responsiveness, rather than active planning ahead. Still, she demonstrated enough alertness to be deemed capable of consent. That's why it's not rape.
164
@83: Really? one pump and "he got the fun part?" That doesn't sound like much fun for either of them. I'd say likely as not he got the embarrassment-and-shame-part that comes with a tendency for premature orgasm.

The whole, "it was bad sex and she didn't want it" angle is also pretty shaky. Sure, what she didn't want was bad sex, but she didn't know that was how it was going to play out until it had started.

The one thing that she can be credibly seen to not want was to be an interloper in this guy's other relationship. But in that case, she probably really, really shouldn't have climbed in the backseat, taken off the requisite clothing, and assumed a position where penetration could happen immediately upon answering the question "Are you on birth control?" in the affirmative.

165
@162 EricaP

That's great advice for the girls and boys in high school. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if this information were a real eye-opener for them both.
166
@163: I think what it all points to is that there is a lot more that we don't know about this situation than we do. Naturally, everyone observing it is filling in the blanks in a way that tends to reinforce their first impressions from this story.

I took nothing from the letter that led me to conclude that CL was "wasted". I figured they'd had a two or three beers, each enough to lower her inhibitions - and his.
167
@166: This time, in English:

I figured they'd had two or three beers each, enough to lower her inhibitions - and his.

(Believe or not, I've had no beers today - yet.)
168
@154, 155: Alcohol and most drugs tend to make guys last longer and make it harder to come. So he probably wasn't really drunk.

If only there were a drug that made it easier to come: whoever invents that will be a billionaire.
169
@167 - he had no inhibitions. He was happy to cheat on his girlfriend when sober.
170
@166, 167: That made me laugh. :)
171
Alcohol's metabolism in women can affect her sex hormones, and this may be a factor (as well as removing inhibitions) in behavior which she may regret the next day.

I feel Dan's advice to CL is fine in the sense he's talking about more considerate behavior between 2 people, trying to improve their behavior, not getting on the Rights hobby-horse.

I'd suggest that those that want to do so, do some reading about inalienable rights, philosophy, and whether it's sensible to be so dogmatic about them, when there are grounds for principled disagreement or nuancing of them. For example, rights are only defined by duties on other people to do or not do things - and it's a really good idea to make sure that those other people have agreed to that! And inflexible attitudes to them leads to undesirable and inhumane behaviors.

Supposing Roe vs Wade had gone the other way (and I'm of sufficient vintage to be jaundiced about the morality and quality of laws anyway) - would you then be pontificating in the same way about Rights - which would be legally quite different? The law is an ass, and I think it's up to real people in real situations to improve things for each other in the situation they find themselves. I also liked the comment that future changes in reproductive technology could render the particular woman's "ownership" of the pregnancy moot in the case she was going to abort, in which case, what are the rights then? Or even, suppose there became the capability of a complete IVF pregnancy to term - does the woman still have complete rights over that even though all she's done is spew an ovum. And even today in rent-a-womb situations, the surrogate doesn't have that many rights, the biological mother does. Show some humility people!
172
@169: Again, with respect, you are reading things into the letter that aren't there. The sum total of what we know about them pre-drunken-back-seat:

"I was hanging out with a guy who is in a relationship. I told him nothing could happen, and we decided to keep things friendly."

Maybe he wanted to cheat. Maybe he wanted to dump his girl for her. Maybe he and his girl have an arrangement. Maybe... maybe... maybe...

We all bring our own experiences and prejudices to our interpretation of this situation.
173
@171 dameedna

I for one wasn't talking about legal rights. My comments were strictly from the perspective of moral rights. The letter writer was clearly not asking for legal opinions, but rather was asking whether she (not the law) should recognize a man's right in this situation.

I agree that "the law is a ass" as Dickens wrote.
174
Backyard Bombardier:
I want to make a general comment that I like your perspective on the shades of gray in the letter. We do all bring our baggage into this. Thanks for all of your comments in this thread. I've seen you around enough to know what a good guy you are.
175
@ 143 KateRose, I'm sorry it seemed like I was putting words in your mouth, I was just inquiring which of the positions I listed you hold. There are not really that many paths to take should you find yourself pregnant, one is to keep the pregnancy and the other is to terminate it.

It looks like you can't imagine that a woman can simply not want to be pregnant and give birth to a baby (either at that point in her life or ever) - it doesn't really matter what's gonna happen to the baby, will the father raise it, will it be put up for adoption etc. when the woman *doesn't want to be pregnant and give birth to a baby*. So you ask "why not ask for baby daddy's opinion", well there's your answer, because no matter what his opinion, it won't change the mind of the woman who *doesn't want to be pregnant and give birth to a baby*. My question is why ask for his opinion in that case, what's the point? When he is able to take the fetus from her body and implant it in his (as someone here has suggested) that's when his opinion on the matter will be relevant.
176
@172 "Maybe he wanted to dump his girl for her."

lol. Yeah, maybe the reason he stopped talking to her is because it hurt so much that she wouldn't return his affections.
177
@128: There are definitely women who get turned on by the idea that they're so sexy their partner comes right away. Especially if she's enthusiastic about having sex with the guy and he takes the time to make her come as well.

Doesn't sound like that happened with the LW, though.
178
@176: Or...

"The next day, I got all emotional about our situation in relation to his relationship, and OMG what kind of girl does he think I am now, and blah blah blah. He's since stopped talking to me because I freaked."

You said "he was happy to cheat on his girlfriend when sober." But we don't know that. All we know is that one night when she - and possibly he - was drunk, they had sex. And that she freaked out the next day, and that he stopped talking to her.

Don't get me wrong - this guy is certainly no candidate for Boyfriend of the Year (or Hookup of the Year, for that matter). But (and I may be reading into things here) you seem to be trying to paint him as some sort of not-quite-rapey-but-certainly-quite-scummy guy that I just don't see the evidence supporting.

My view? Dude had a few beers, did something stupid, regretted it, and is now desperately trying to pretend it didn't happen. He's hardly the first.
179
@178 - Yes. I am depicting him as scummy.

I don't believe he offered to break up with his girlfriend for her;

I don't believe his girlfriend knew/knows he has sex with other women;

I don't believe he stayed around to keep on making out with CL and see that she was happy and got home safely;

I do believe he saw an opportunity to stick his dick in pussy, and didn't consider any consequences except pregnancy.

I do believe that when CL was upset ("freaked") afterward, he turned his back on her.

And, yes, all this is based on my RL experiences, rather than what is in the letter. The question is -- if she wrote back to say I was right, how many Sloggers would continue to say that the guy did nothing (ethically) wrong, and she knew what risks she was taking by going drinking, and besides: "CL is a filthy whore. A dirty, dirty whore." (See @78.)
180
I don't think "she knew what risks she was taking by going drinking." I think she knew what risks she was taking by making out with a guy who she knew was interested in her. I think she made the decision to do that in part because her inhibitions and judgement were affected by alcohol.

I don't think he "did nothing (ethically) wrong." Whatever his intentions were originally, at the time they had sex he was in a relationship and I agree that it probably wasn't open. I think he did this because, like her, his inhibitions and judgement were affected by alcohol.

I also think that we don't know who initiated the climbing into the backseat, the raciness, or the making out. This makes it even harder to determine who may be at fault - if there is in fact any fault to be assessed.

I have my own personal perspectives on this from my own life experiences, including one with a young lady who wasn't that interested in anything romantic with me - unless she'd been drinking. So I have a sense of what goes on in a man's mind when a woman he's interested in starts getting drunk and flirty.

Oh, and I think @78 is a troll and an asshole, and it isn't fair to suggest that his post is reflective of the views of many Sloggers. It certainly isn't reflective of mine.

182
right to privacy -

I should have clarified better my final paragraph that primarily such a discussion should happen between two long-term or committed people - well before any pregnancy should occur. In situations where it's a one-night stand or...whatever we want to call this, it should be more of a case by case basis. If he's a complete stranger who you can't get back into contact with, then I'd say it's none of their business. But if he's, say, a good friend or within a circle of friends, that's a completely different situation, and one that I think the woman in question should at least consider before going it alone, especially if her feelings on the issue are conflicted. Let me establish that I do think the final choice is ultimately the woman's; he has no right to *impose* his will on her nor would I support legislation that requires her to contact him.

While I understand what you're getting at about the birth control issue, most of the popular EC pills (such as Plan B) are not distinguished abortifacients because they don't involve altering the implantation of a blastocyte. Usually they work by delaying ovulation, and are unlikely to disrupt an already implanted embryo. I think we can go out on a limb and say anybody engaging in premarital sex and/or using condoms has forfeited any moral pedestal (religious morality, anyway) to delineate between what's acceptable contraception and what isn't.
183
Ms Erica @137 - While there are certainly practical reasons to consider making out and going all the way to be different, I'd see it as no more than a question of degree. Avoiding the risk of pregnancy is a mild plus in that at least one is taking care to prevent lasting bad consequences, but I wouldn't think CL any more disrespectful of the relationship had she wanted, given enthusiastic consent to or even initated the pregnancy risk. I don't care much about labels (I just like cross-examining people), but whatever I'd apply to the penetration I'd apply to the making out.

A lot of people I know would fall into one of two camps on this sort of point. Many have bascially formalized lists of the sort that A/B/C are permitted and X/Y/Z are prohibited. The other camp appears to follow the line from The Seven Deadly Virtues, "...and Fidelity is only for your mate." They'd call their partners cheaters for making out, but, if they ever happened to do it themselves, would proclaim their innocence and appear hurt by being questioned.
184
Ms Erica @137 - While there are certainly practical reasons to consider making out and going all the way to be different, I'd see it as no more than a question of degree. Avoiding the risk of pregnancy is a mild plus in that at least one is taking care to prevent lasting bad consequences, but I wouldn't think CL any more disrespectful of the relationship had she wanted, given enthusiastic consent to or even initated the pregnancy risk. I don't care much about labels (I don't go around playing Slut, Slut, Goose! - I just like cross-examining people), but whatever I'd apply to the penetration I'd apply to the making out.

A lot of people I know would fall into one of two camps on this sort of point. Many have bascially formalized lists of the sort that A/B/C are permitted and X/Y/Z are prohibited. The other camp appears to follow the line from The Seven Deadly Virtues, "...and Fidelity is only for your mate." They'd call their partners cheaters for making out, but, if they ever happened to do it themselves, would proclaim their innocence and appear hurt by being questioned.
185
My apologies for the double post. I added the bit about Slut, Slut, Goose! only accidentally to hit post instead of save and then tried to override it by hitting save right away.

I shouldn't actually play it myself, I rather think, but it does seem to be a game with some potential.
186
@171

"Alcohol's metabolism in women can affect her sex hormones"

elaboration and/or citation pretty please?

@181 Hunter

cute. but that's not what I meant
187
I don't know if I missed it, but was there no reference in here at all about the guy who fucked the first letter writer not wearing a condom??? EricaP said she thought the letter writer was surprised when he penetrated her - I sure as hell would have been if I were her. You don't just fuck someone bareback, even if you are on BC, even if you know them. Especially if they have a girlfriend and an obvious willingness to cheat on her. Don't care if you are drunk. There was a missing step here - he asked if she was on BC, she says yes, she is, because she was, and then wham - dick. Well, there's an intermediate step between most not-in-LTR consenting adults and it seems likely that she expected condoms to come into the picture before dick. He should have at the very least asked about it. I don't think you get to put your dick naked in anyone without asking unless she's the one putting it in. Being drunk and trusting this guy a bit too much would make it likely that she didn't expect condomless sneak-attack sex. And a friend definitely wouldn't come inside you without at least running it by you. Not ok. I'm with EricaP all the way on this. Guys, I guess you haven't been suddenly unexpectedly penetrated by someone, but I tell you, not only is it easy to make happen on the part of the sneaky dick owner (panties are not a defense against anything, especially when you are straddling his lap in the traditional back of the car make-out position), but when making out the only thing keeping that from happening are two thin pieces of fabric - his pants and your underwear, sometimes just your underwear. Not saying it's rape but it can't be consensual if you aren't expecting it.
188
@187 - especially if she didn't know his dick was out and about. That would be a shock. If she did know, even if she hauled it out herself, doesn't make any difference. There is a huge difference between making out and full out fucking, and I would make out with lots of people (especially when drunk) I would NEVER let inside me, drunk or sober. If he was a stranger, yeah, not smart to get in the car. But he was a trusted friend, so she felt safe. And he was still an ass.
189
@187 - not to mention his assholishness in not watching out for his unknowing girlfriend's health! Putting her at STD risk, while cheating on her = double douchebag.
191
TELL THE GUY!

What sort of world are we trying to make here! Talk people!

Do what you gotta do. But afterward, be a human in a civilized society and share.

Also to you freaks screaming about "the man doesn't need to know anything...."
Shut up. You read a one sided, very short description. You know nothing.
192
Badgirl, you're the one who sounds angry here. There are reasons why consent to sex has been defined this way, and I guess you can choose to ignore those reasons, but do you really think that our rape laws have been written by "angry womyn feminazis"? Especially the ones that require evidence of physical struggle and resisting?

Like I said before, a person who drinks and then chooses to get behind the wheel or penetrate someone else sexually is making a particular active choice to do something, regardless of drunkenness. Meanwhile, the person who drinks and is penetrated may not have made any such choice at all.

I find it pathetic that you attack "feminazis" while saying things like: "if she is old enough and mature enough to imbibe alcohol and drugs and be in a mixed gender setting, SHE should be old enough and mature enough to understand the risks this entails." Old enough? Honey, kids drink and take drugs, kids who are legally considered incapable of consenting to sex. But stick with adults: why should women have to be afraid of having a drink in a mixed gender setting? Why is a woman assuming the risk of being raped if she does that? Are you a representative of the Taliban or something?

This has nothing to do with personal responsibility, so please put that tired old ax down. I would certainly teach my daughters to use their heads when partying, and understand the risks of different situations. However, it is completely normal in this culture for men and women to socialize with each other, including drinking, without any assumption that sex is on the menu.

Just to clarify: if someone gets wasted and you sexually penetrate them, you are raping them. This isn't a matter of opinion; it's typically the law. If you think that's a bad law, fine, but at least let's begin by accepting reality. You're also really confused about what would constitute a theft under these circumstances. Not everyone is a lawyer, I know, but please--there are actually facts about these issues, and you could consult them before saying false things. Otherwise, I need to come to your house when you're wasted, and arrange to buy some of your stuff.
193
I feel pretty, oh so pretty, I feel pretty, and witty, and [gulp]...
194
Exactly, Suzy. Very well put.
195
@186 "Alcohol's metabolism in women can affect her sex hormones"

See for example: http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/content…

While the link between changes to sex hormones and desire/libido is not nailed up, evidence from gender change experiences indicates that it can be a factor. From personal experience, DW's behavior when she's had alcohol goes way beyond what I feel attributable to lowered inhibitions - she's sexually aggressive. Her desire is active (in Basson's terms) and goes beyond what her normal (reactive)stance would be - to a situation where I wonder about my consent! And it makes me very leery of the integrity of rape-while-drunk laws because of the alteration of values and consent (which may be distorted at the time).

Certainly, while there are laws in my jurisdiction about it, prosecutors are very reluctant to press charges in most non-violent circumstances, and juries have usually thrown the cases out - rightly in my view because there's far too high a risk of conviction of the innocent. Which means that it's a really good idea to manage the situation early, and have people around you you trust, and take some responsibility yourself. Part of that responsibility is understanding that alcohol can distort values and reactions so that one is not only consenting but actively seeking outcomes they regret the next day. The law can't always protect you, as well as it being an ass.
196
@173 the trouble with legal rights is that people use them to justify moral rights - but only when convenient. When the law says the "wrong" thing for them, they ignore that. Sounds like we both have the same opinion of the moral quality of laws! I also have the feeling that state coercion may be as bad as individual coercion sometimes, because those laws reflect a flawed balance, and far too often are interfering where the state has no valid claim at all (e.g. the tyranny of the majority).

As far as moral rights are concerned, I'm always uneasy when people push hardline individual rights, because that can over-weight autonomy and individuality. We are social creatures and fairly pathetic on our own. I prefer the notions of distributed justice, and in a way I think that's what Dan's trying to say - do the decent thing in this circumstance.
197
Hey, FOFS: I'm completely over my totally batshit ex-husband, and have been much more happily so over the past 10 years.

Aaaaaaaaand, he's totally over me, too. Six months after our divorce, he remarried some mail-order bride who he met on the internet. My condolences to his Wife #2, and any kids they might have had together.

FOFS, you'll get over it. I did. It just takes time. I'm sorry about your ex-boyfriend who recently died.
198
Well, I tried to reply yesterday to some of the posts, but, apparently, it won't let me do it from my phone. So here's hoping I can follow the same train of thought I had yesterday.

@162 "@159, Your school did not say rape is when a man has sex without a "signed, notarized permission slip." That's your exaggeration."
Indeed it is my exaggeration. That's why I didn't say she SAID that, I said she practically did. And as far as my second example: Yes. They did use it as an example of rape. Not me, the person that spoke to my class.
I don't know if you've noticed this, but, from reading your other posts, it seems we have a pretty similar opinion about what is/isn't rape.
You also said:
"I would tell high school girls the corollary: If you are naked in bed with a guy, especially if you are drunk - you may find yourself having sex without ever having decided to. And you will have to face the consequences. "
That was actually exactly my point. If you consider yourself mature enough to engage in any sort of sexual activity, you should be mature enough to set up ground rules ahead of time, or at least realize that boundaries may get unknowingly pushed because you didn't vocalize what they are.

@175 "It looks like you can't imagine that a woman can simply not want to be pregnant and give birth to a baby "
I can imagine that. And I can imagine circumstances like in many of the examples where it would be just plain bad planning to tell the father, whether because he would become abusive mentally/physically or because he was a one night stand and you don't even know his name or how to contact him. I don't think that its a right that should be held up by a law or anything of the sort. I just think it's being a decent human being to tell someone that you care about when you make a decision that affects their life. And, when I make decisions for myself, I do give friends, both male and female, the option to talk me out of them. Because if they can, I wasn't all that sure of my decision anyway. When I'm sure, you can't change my mind for anything. If someone is the sort that does not now, and never will, want to carry or give birth to a child, you won't change their mind. But why shouldn't you give a friend/bf the chance to at least know they potentially fathered a child. Maybe, as Dan said, they'll learn to be more careful in the future. Maybe they'll only do things like not using a condom with someone who would be ok with having their child.
199
So much raging sexism in here. So a woman gets sole choice whether to abort, adopt-away/abandon, or raise for 18 years, but a guy never gets any choice. Child support laws are out-of-date and un-just. A man shouldn't have control over her body/the fetus/her life, but likewise she should not have control over his.
--J5A
200
So much raging sexism in here. So a woman gets sole choice whether to abort, adopt-away/abandon, or raise for 18 years, but a guy never gets any choice. Child support laws are out-of-date and un-just. A man shouldn't have control over her body/the fetus/her life, but likewise she should not have control over his.
--J.
201
So much raging sexism in here. So a woman gets sole choice whether to abort, adopt-away/abandon, or raise for 18 years, but a guy never gets any choice. Child support laws are out-of-date and un-just. A man shouldn't have control over her body/the fetus/her life, but likewise she should not have control over his.
--JA5

P.S. Sorry for the multi-post..the registration/posting system here doesn't work too well when you're a first-time post-er.
202
@201 JA5

Is there an epidemic of sperm-stealing women that I've haven't heard about? Don't want a baby that bad? Don't fuck. Your choice. Your control.
203
@203 And you could also say:

Want individual rights, no responsibilities for others, and complete autonomy? Don't fuck. Your choice. Your control.
204
So much raging sexism in here. So a woman gets sole choice whether to abort, adopt-away/abandon, or raise for 18 years, but a guy never gets any choice. Child support laws are out-of-date and un-just. A man shouldn't have control over her body/the fetus/her life, but likewise she should not have control over his.
--JA5

P.S. Sorry for the multi-post, but the system here works extremely poorly when you're brand-new registering.
205
@202/203 Mr. J./dameedna

Don't have sex? That's your answer to sexism and unequal rights? Awesome. I bet that advice would've gone over great with women decades ago. Are you a pro-choice woman? Too bad, you don't deserve that right, don't have sex. Do you like to vote or own property? Too bad, you don't deserve that right, move to another country. Upset about unequal pay? Marry a rich man.

Women have complete freedom to give up responsibility. They can abort, adopt-away, or abandon. Men have zero likewise freedoms.

P.S. Argh, even with a re-load this page isn't always showing the latest comments, mine or others'
206
@ 204 dameedna Huzzah! I think that sums it up perfectly for BOTH genders.
207
@ 205. I don't believe it's ridiculous at all. They're not saying people shouldn't have sex. What they're saying is that, should people CHOOSE to have sex, they need to realize that they have at least a minimal responsibility to the person they're having sex with. Even if that responsibility boils down to "don't be a douche". If you don't want to have even a .0000001% chance that you'll have to have responsibility to someone else, than you shouldn't do the thing that puts you at risk of it.

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


    Add a comment
    Preview

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.