Consent videos

Following the Meetoo Epstein/ Weinstein/ Cosby problems ,playas are now requiring VIDEO

EVIDENCE of consent 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7867376/women-consent-videos-before-s…

I can understand the minor celebrity doing it.  If you're going to take a video before each sex act you won't get much done in a single night.  Love the bazza also suggesting that the recorded consent might be ambiguous.

Maybe I'll start filming in the pub with agreement to leave the pub and go back to mine then a video of agreeing to come through my front door and so on...

Any guy who is afraid of being accused of rape should probably not be allowed anywhere near women.

What if the woman changes her mind after the consent video?

I think that is why this sort of thing isn't that helpful Wellers. But it will still provide some protection presumably as consent is confirmed until that point. 

Yeah, stru. If you are dumb enough to sleep with a nutter, but you know, at least you should, that she is an outlier, and that 99 times out of 100 it is the men who rape that get away with it.

Of course she's a nutter Supes, but the point being this kind of thing does happen and it is not a one in a million. Very much the minority of allegations and most allegations are genuine and sincere (that does not automatically mean the man is guilty of course) but there are enough of these false allegations that all allegations need to be investigated properly and impartially. 

Also, as far as this woman goes - how were these guys supposed to know she's a nutter? The first guy (who spent 7 years in jail), literally asked her if she was sure she wanted to sleep with him 3 times..

Don't care. In the grand scheme of things to be worried about this is way down at the bottom together with being shot by a random sniper and getting bitten by a Tse Tse fly.

 

It's all menenist, red-pill garbage

So the argument is that one nutter in one hundred makes a false allegation* and as a result men should avoid all women and film consent and the basic premise is that all women are out to make malicious claims of rape. 

 

Meanwhile, in reality land, one in five women experience sexual assault and yet somehow we are the ones being unreasonable. 

 

Do men have any idea of what massive cockwombles they seem to be in this situation?

 

*and that is being extremely generous given actual statistics

I guess other minor celebs like ched evans and paddy jackson might consider this is a very sensible precaution 

Because they are a bit rapey? Yeah, maybe they should consider it.

Scylls, 

 

1. I didn't say (if you were talking about me and not the article) that "men should avoid all women and film consent" - I said when such allegations are made, they should be investigated neutrally like all criminal allegations and not approached from the perspective "she must be telling the truth, women don't lie". Or in other words, the possibility of a false allegation needs to be considered and ruled out. In exactly the same way as if you report your phone stolen in a street mugging, the police will at least consider the possibility that it was an insurance scam. 

 

2. How do you know false allegations are only one in a hundred? Serious question. 

3. The "one in five women experience sexual assault" thing has been widely debunked - it's from that US college women study - or to be more precise, it included a whole lot of things that - while it may be unpleasant - no reasonable person would call "sexual assault" - stuff like a guy you didn't fancy asking you out (aka "unwanted advances") or being whistled at on the street. (I don't know the true rate of sexual assault, but that particular study has been widely debunked). 

Plenty of men experience sexual assault but we tend not to mention it because when we do people laugh about it and tell us to man up.

The absolute state of McFailure on this thread.

Imagine actually thinking like that. Californians should be deported. Christ, no wonder everyone hates them

 

 

i think it's okay as long as you carry on filming afterwards

 

I havent read this but from the title alone it is clear this is right wing shit aimed at undermining the movement and the rights of women.

 

FFS 

"So the argument is that one nutter in one hundred makes a false allegation* and as a result men should avoid all women and film consent and the basic premise is that all women are out to make malicious claims of rape". 

If the figure was actually a 1 in 100 chance of going to jail and having your life ruined then yes I think that would be a very valid argument.  1 in 100 is not small odds at all for such a dire downside and a single man could quite easily become more likely than not falsely accused at some point if he is particularly promiscuous/successful with women

Guy - I hope the word "successful" is used in jest? otherwise that says things about you 

Don't think this would have worked for Ian Watkins.

Supes/Scylla - are you suggesting that the bar for conviction for sexual assault/rape should be lowered? Or what?

Perhaps judges and juries should adopt the (now dropped) met police policy of "automatically believing" rape complainants? 

The problem with rape and sexual assault convictions is a simple factual problem of EVIDENCE - without changing the rules (please elaborate) these crimes are always going to be very difficult to prosecute. I absolutely accept that there is a massive problem but going down the route of lowering the evidential bar is a frightening prospect and, without wishing to be too pompous, undermines the fundamentals of the rule of law.

The expression “Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer,” is usually attributed to Blackstone.

Sir William Blackstone was a jurist in eighteenth century England who wrote the four-volume treatise, Commentaries on the Laws of England. First published in 1766, it quickly went into multiple printings.

When the Constitutional Convention met during the summer of 1787, nearly every delegate was familiar with Blackstone’s commentaries and the principles of English Common Law. The disputes at that convention centered on distribution of power and the abolition of the slave trade. The delegates were in agreement about the principle behind what has come to be known as Blackstone’s Formulation: “Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” Over two years earlier, Benjamin Franklin had moved the decimal a place to the right in a letter to Benjamin Vaughan (Mar. 14, 1785), when he wrote “that it is better one hundred guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.”

The exact number is not the main issue, however. Even a quick bit of research will show that the main idea of it being better that x guilty persons go free than to condemn a single innocent has been expressed across centuries and cultures with a variety of values for x.

Historically, those who do not accept the general premise have been characters such as Pol Pot, (a study at Yale University estimated he was responsible for the deaths of over 20% of the Cambodian population,) or Feliks Dzerzhinsky, founder of the Soviet secret police. Since 9-11 and the public’s increased awareness of terrorism, some of the fearful have tried to argue, “what if the guilty use their freedom to bomb hundreds of innocent school children,” which is a straw man fallacy.

 

"That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved." Benjamin Franklin

Perhaps judges and juries should adopt the (now dropped) met police policy of "automatically believing" rape complainants? 

 

I would have no problem with this al all

 

Ben Franklin needs to check his privilege