Columbia University Rape Victim Recreates Rape via Porn

Why do ugly women people want people to look at them naked?

she wasnt a rape victim. shes a liar

I've never felt so much disgust and indegestion as when I read that. This girl just... Ugh.

Wow, that is fucked up.

What the ****, North Carolina?

In their defense, that does eliminate a lot of gray area. It just encourages people to actually have to think twice before having sex with someone not trustworthy...which is never a bad thing.

**** that shit. People shouldn't have to "think twice" before committing to a decision, nor should people have to be reduced to finding out whether or not someone is "trustworthy" before having sex with them. People should be allowed to change their fucking minds without it being legal for for them to be fucking raped.

Preach it, brother!

I would not want to be the male end of that performance piece, I mean it seems like she's going to great lengths for attention, she could just as easy claim her co-star for real raped her afterwards in an attempt to inspire sympathy.

People shouldn't have to "think twice" before committing to a decision

First off, this is one of the silliest things I've ever heard. Why not? Sex has tons of repercussions. It's something that you should definitely think long and hard about before you start passing your body around freely. If you don't, you suffer consequences. Nature itself is there to remind you not to be care about who you have sex with (infections, pregnancy, diseases). Furthermore, there are a billion decisions you have to think twice before committing them. Such as having an abortion. You think you shouldn't have to think twice before having an abortion? You must live in a pretty care free world if you believe you shouldn't have to commit to any decisions in life, especially concerning situations where a lack of care can result in fatal disease on your behalf.

nor should people have to be reduced to finding out whether or not someone is "trustworthy" before having sex with them.

Someone shouldn't have to find out if someone is trustworthy before having sex with them? So you think having sex with strangers comes with no repercussions of its own? You are aware condoms don't prevent all STD's right? Hell - many people aren't even aware many STD's are passed orally. People should definitely be encouraged to have sex with people they trust. I'm sure there are plenty of awful STD victims who wish they were encouraged to only have sex with people they trust. There are plenty of women who suffered symptomless chlamydia and can't have children anymore as a result because they would have care-free sex and never felt any symptoms so they were under the impression they never contracted any infection.

If the girl didn't want to have sex, and actually put up a struggle, and the guy fought her - are you sure this law in question protects against sexual physical assault? I'd be willing to wager there are other charges that could be pooled against a guy if the woman actually didn't want to have sex, such as assault charges.

What if there was loud music playing and the girl was muttering it, didn't struggle, and the guy legitimately didn't hear it? You really think the guy should go to jail?

What about a couple who play a game where the girl likes to pretend to be raped? This is *very* common. Should the guy have to go to jail because after the dozen previous times of playing this game (with no safe word), this time when she said "stop" really meant stop, despite the situation not carrying out any different than usual?

I don't necessarily agree with the law, I'm playing devil's advocate, but I can see why a state simply wouldn't want to deal with cases like these because the idea of rape after consent sits on rather shaky ground. I can imagine it being a lot easier to encourage people to think for a second before consenting to some random dude putting his dick in your mouth/ass/vagina. Especially if you hold the belief that people should only have sex after marriage (and assume it would be an unlikely scenario for a woman to consent to sex and retract with their husband).

So I have not watched the video (I'm assuming it falls under NSFW territory), and I am very much leaning towards this being the rare attention seeker. That being said it leaves me with a few questions, is this how she is choosing (consciously or unconsciously) to cope? Is she doing this so that others might have some idea of what to do should they find themselves in a similar situation?

We weren't talking about STD's, we were talking about RAPE. Lots of things have repercussions if you don't "think twice", but fucking RAPE should never be one of those repercussions. In the event that rape does happen, it's entirely on the RAPIST and not the person who was raped.

And dude, wtf? How the hell are you even supposed to know that someone's trustworthy enough to not rape you, until you've been in a situation in which they could? By that standard, no one would ever have sex. People actually get raped by their husbands and boyfriends, never mind strangers or casual acquaintances. If someone has never had the OPPORTUNITY to rape you, you have zero basis for knowing without a doubt that they won't rape you. And even if you have had sex with someone a hundred times, that STILL doesn't mean that they won't rape you. You're not only saying that people can't change their mind after consent and decide, "gee, on second thought I actually don't want to have sex with this person." You're also imposing an absolutely ludicrous standard in which the rape victim is still at fault for not having read the rapist's fucking mind. Please tell me how the hell one is supposed to know without a doubt that their partner isn't going to rape them.

And no, rape after consent doesn't sit on shaky ground. She changes her mind after consent, tells the man to stop and then he keeps going, then it's rape. That's about as clear cut as you can get.