Alexander Ryking

While a judge Thursday tossed out the rape charge, it remains far from certain if Gibson, 24, will face any consequences.

L.A. prosecutors have said they have no plans to charge her with making false accusations, saying it would be a tough case to prove.

Legal experts noted it could be difficult for the Long Beach school district and its insurer to get the settlement back [because she has few assets]…

The statute of limitations for making a false claim is four years, but experts say it could restart when a previously hidden crime is discovered. In this case, Gibson testified in 2003 during Banks’ preliminary hearing but recanted her accusation last year. “No, he did not rape me,” she told Banks and his private investigator in a recorded conversation.

“The prosecution can say that we only learned last year that the crime of perjury occurred and therefore we are still within the statute of limitations,” Loyola Law professor Stan Goldman said.

The fact that Gibson was a juvenile when she initially made her accusation poses a potential complication, as does the fact that she has since recanted her recantation, but Goldman said the large monetary settlement she received might make charging her a priority to prosecutors trying to ensure the integrity of the criminal justice system.

I agree that stopping rape is everyone’s responsibility.

That’s exactly why I can’t condone these posters. They, and the ‘Men Can Stop Rape’ organisation, are not egalitarian. They tap into the basest of patriarchal stereotypes regarding chivalry, and they continue the dumping of expectations on men which can only be called institutional oppression. That’s not something any feminist can support. Since when was the ‘women are weak and need a big strong man to save them’ sentiment you’re outlining feminist anyway? As far as I can see, it really isn’t…

I don’t have a problem with expecting being to help because they’re good people, but I do have a problem with expecting men to help women because it’s their social role, and not expect the reverse. But that’s not even my main objection. In my full response, I point out that this message doesn’t make sense within the rest of feminist theory (probably because, as I said, the message isn’t a very feminist one).

Lookoutsideyourself, those other anti-rape messages that you mention? They’re victim blaming. You will not find them on a feminist blog, because they emphasise that the rapist is the only one responsible for stopping the rape: not the victim, and certainly people who know the victim. It is absurd to say “oh the victim doesn’t need to protect herself one bit because if she gets raped it’s not her fault” and then go to her male friends and tell them that it is their obligation, and therefore implicitly would be their fault. It literally does not make sense for a feminist to support both messages, because it is clearly even less of the friend’s responsibility than it is the victim’s.

Secondly, I point out that victim blaming means that men can’t give women any advice on how to lower their risk of being raped, but these posters suggest that men are still required to intervene and save her if it looks possible. So the man can’t ask a woman not to go into a dangerous situation, but when she does it suddenly becomes his responsibility to get her out of it. He isn’t allowed to warn her before, and it’s not at all her responsibility to get out of it or listen to advice in the first place. So the mixed messages forbid men from doing what would actually help prevent rape, whilst expecting them to put themselves in the line of fire to physically stop it. Women need to make no sacrifices at all to avoid their own rape, but men have to make sacrifices to prevent women’s. Because they’re men, and that’s what their for.

In a move that keeps the number of rape victims looking much higher than it really is, the FBI has redefined rape to include consensual sex while drunk that one later regrets.

Part of their new definition update is good. The old definition left out men and some variations of rape. However, the inclusion of drunken sex was a very stupid thing. They are not only referring to people who are passed out from being drunk, but also ones who are simply drunk or tipsy, saying “yes”, and then regretting their choice the next day…

There is only one solution to this that I can see. Are the men who are having sex with drunk women not also drunk themselves? In that case, have they both raped each other? Men will have to start considering themselves raped whenever they regret sex after drinking…

There’s also another danger to the trend of calling drunkenness “mental incapacity” in regards to sex. Here’s what I mean. What if a drunk man really does rape a sober woman? Will he be able to use being drunk as an excuse that he was too incapacitated to realize what he was doing? That may be a bit of a slippery slope stretch, but maybe not… Non-rapes could get called rapes, and real rapes could get called non-rapes.