1. From the post-titled “Dear god what about the dudes?!” which is “Required reading for first-time dude commenters.” And I quote:

“Male persons who wish to leave comments on this blog are strongly encouraged not to.”

“But really, it would be better if men just didn’t post in the first place. Really.”

2. From Comrade PhsyioProf’s Handy-Dandy Guide For D00dly Commenters:

“(3) If you are using the words “should” or “useful”, you are almost certainly fucking up.

(4) If you are telling people that talking about this, that, or the other issue is fine, but also asking them what they are doing about this issue, you are almost certainly fucking up.”

3. Finally, from “Guidelines for Commenters at I Blame The Patriarchy”:

“If you find yourself commenting more than 2 or 3 times on a given post, please consider shutting the old piehole.”

So, as you can see, I broke rules 1 and 2 in my first post. With this post I have proceeded to break rule number 3. And now I’m done posting and never even got a chance to do some good ol’ fashioned internet ad hominem attack spewing. But, at least my reputation for not whining, being illiterate or having particularly valuable time is intact.

In other words, you have not complied with the Terms Of Use Agreement despite the fact that when you clicked “Blame” you affirmed that you had, and your time is very valuable, so would I mind bringing you up to speed on my time?

Ha!

That having been said, as much as I think the post is a valuable and worthwhile thought experiment, doesn’t the prosecution of rape, like other crimes, come down to the issue of evidence? Which is to say, at any point be it the day after or 13 years down the road wouldn’t a woman still need physical proof that she had intercourse with the male she’s prosecuting?

Which is to stress, if you think you might have been raped you should see a SANE nurse immediately? I think if a woman has proof that she had sex with a man and says she did not give consent that should be sufficient. Though, I’ll grant the “collection of evidence” is a very nice way of saying something extremely unpleasant to go through. Nor does my point do anything about jury bias which, I believe, Twisty is trying to address in her post? It’s also possible I have a facile understanding how rape accusations are processed in our legal system…

Everything happens under a patriarchal model but a few women still engage in commerce without duress, abuse or encountering a glass ceiling. The contracts they make are made without question by their consent. There are such heterosexual arrangements as well. I come from a culture which is certainly patriarchal, yet was taught that the rules required women to determine when and how often sex occurs in a relationship. Complete denial of sex was grounds for divorce by either party, but it was all at the woman’s behest. It doesn’t make the patriarchal model any less objectionable nor does it mean all the guys play by those rules. It just says rape isn’t allowable under that particular model of gender inequality. Marriage is not a state of implied, continuous consent. Heterosexual relations are not, by default, a crime against women.

For legal purposes, definitions matter. The issue of retroactive consent is moot. Injury done to the woman post-consent is battery. From an STD to rough sex, it is an injury and there is no need to label it rape for it to be a crime. Verbal abuse or physical menacing in a sexual manner is indecent assault. As for consent, we can look at the concept of entrapment where cops seduce prostitutes. They have to first elicit an actual invitation to sex for money. They are not allowed to assume it and arrest on that basis. Males should wait to be invited instead of looking for ’signals’ because ‘good girls’ wouldn’t think of inviting sex. Heterosexual women need to issue their own invitations and avoid men who find that objectionable. We have to learn to find actual (versus implied) consent to be erotic or we are selecting men who are really turned on by the concept of coercion. Men should get used to going without if women aren’t inviting them. Hopefully they won’t feel safe in sexual relations without such explicit consent.

Women who are into the Madonna complex and can’t be openly complicit in the sex act without feeling guilty, are never actually consenting to sex. Getting away from it until you are clear about its effects upon you is a good idea. Marcy, take note that seduction itself is a game for already established lovers where it is welcome and can be turned into a ‘no’ at any time. It is not a model for equality or consent between new lovers of any gender pairing but a post-consent form of play. If you switch partners in future, don’t assume it’s a safe game to play with the next guy. Trusting a man and finding a man to be trustworthy, are two different things. The power and the privilege…

I mean, sure, it’s not a fatal flaw. You could probably come up with a patch to prevent this kind of abuse if you feel it’s necessary. I just want to point out that false accusations, unlike true ones, can come from any quarter. So it doesn’t speak well of a man when his main fear from this proposal is of accusations of rape from the people he’s had sex with.