Faulted as a Fool

Another female student has been raped in her off-campus apartment (previous case here).  The University Police report that the outrage was perpetrated early Monday morning by a Hispanic male, 18 to 20 years of age, who is “possibly from El Salvador” and “only speaks Spanish.”  (Perhaps he is illiterate, or perhaps that should be “speaks only Spanish.”)  They also tell us that “the victim has been acquainted with the suspect for a short time,” leaving us to wonder how short “a short time” might be.

In any event, we must suppose that it was upon the strength of their short acquaintance that the monolingual El Salvadorian presumed to pay an early-morning visit to “the victim,” although his confidence was further fortified by drink.  Thus, when the victim opened her door in the wee hours, she found herself face to face with a monolingual El Salvadorian of slight acquaintance who was stinking drunk.

Now, what was this young woman to do when such a man appeared on her doorstep in the wee hours?  She was confronted not only with a drunk, but also with what moralists call a dilemma, by which they mean a choice in which both options have a downside.

Her choices were:

  1. Close the door with the drunken El Salvadorian on the outside.  In this case, the downside is that he is outside the door.
  2. Close the door with the drunken El Salvadorian on the inside.  In this case, the downside is that he is inside the door.

No one said life would be easy, young lady!

On this occasion, the young woman chose to close the door with the drunken El Salvadorian inside the door.  And she didn’t only close the door.  She locked it, turned out the lights, and “allowed the suspect to spend the night because he was drunk when he arrived.”

The report of the University Police throws no light on what happened just after the door was closed, but two scenarios occur to my imagination.  The first is a case of Imprudent Altruism, the second is Nooky Gone Wrong.

Young women are, we all know, extremely susceptible to imprudent altruism, especially when the object of their mercy is from a class of designated victims.  Stray cats, wounded birds, and itinerant El Salvadorians, are all instances.  If this El Salvadorian were to hop behind the wheel of a vehicle, the victim may have feared his drunkenness would attract the notice of the police, whereupon his monolingual El Salvadorianness would attract the notice of ICE.  And as everyone knows, ICE is not nice.

What would be nice, she therefore may have thought, would be to invite the young man to sleep it off on the couch.  And since she was so nice to him, “the suspect woke the victim and sexually assaulted her.”

Young women are also extremely susceptible to nooky with males 18 to 20 years of age, this susceptibility once again enhanced when the object of the nooky is from a class of designated victims.  Lust and pity make a potent brew.  Given the suspect’s linguistic limitations, we must suppose that the couple’s short acquaintance was made possible by the victim’s command of Spanish, and from this we may infer that she is drawn to things from south of the border.  She may, in other words, have closed that door with the El Salvadorian on the inside because she was interested in nooky, just not so much nooky as she got when “the suspect woke the victim and sexually assaulted her.”

* * * * *

Towards the end of University Police report appears this line of mandatory modern dogma.

“It is important to remember sexual assault is not the fault of the victim, only a perpetrator can prevent sexual assault.”

This is obviously false.  Indeed, it is dangerously false when it implies that a young woman can do nothing to prevent herself being raped in her own apartment.  The truth, of course, is that a very large number of women, young and old, “prevent sexual assault” with things like locks, and doors, and guns, and the simple words “go away before I call the police.”  They also “prevent sexual assault” by acting on the cold-blooded understanding that nooky can go very wrong if an unsated young man is not set firmly out of doors when the smooching is over.

They “prevent sexual assault” by exercising elemental prudence.

There are no laws against imprudent altruism or late-night nooky, and it is in this legal sense that the victim is not at fault for what happened early Monday morning.  Nothing that she did would seem to fall under the cognizance of the police or the courts.  Nor should it.  But there most certainly are, or at least until not so long ago were, social conventions against such flagrant folly, and everything she did should have fallen under the cognizance of her friends and family.  These people should have long since corrected the victim’s susceptibility to imprudent altruism or late-night nooky with the kindly instruments of mockery and scorn.

They should have made it clear that these things are not done, and that a young woman who persists in doing them, and comes to grief, will be faulted as a fool.

26 thoughts on “Faulted as a Fool

  1. Pingback: Faulted as a Fool | @the_arv

  2. Pingback: Faulted as a Fool | Reaction Times

  3. It’s interesting that this sort of lack of prudence with regards to people who should be considered strangers is seen in adults, while we still teach childeren to be very careful around strangers, not to let strangers into the house, etc. it suggests that our culture teaches these young adults to ignore this childhood wisdom as they grow up, as if what kept them safe as childeren is now completely unnecessary. We cannot allow personal safety to stand in the way of our enlightened compassion and sexual liberation.

  4. We should probably teach young people how to be civil to strangers without imagining that they are friends. A democratic society encourages us to treat all adults as equals, and this seems to cause all adult relationships to converge on the pattern of friendship. Of course, many of these relationships are not friendships (and many are not really equal), so there are endless possibilities for hurt feelings or (as is the case here) greater disasters.

    The miseducation of young women seems to be especially dire. I don’t mean to suggest that they are themselves perfectly innocent, but the culture is doing nothing to counteract young women’s worst instincts. Feminism has beguiled them with an illusion of sexual equality, and thereby encouraged extremely foolhardy behavior.

  5. The convergence of “campus rape culture” with “open borders” equals an explosion in sexually abused white females AMONGST all ages..

    The scenario above is one-hundred percent manufactured from the (t)op down.

  6. We liberals propose a very progressive solution
    We call it affirmative consent.
    The woman must first say “I do” to the man.
    Any nookie outside the bounds of this affirmative consent is to be automatically considered transgressive.
    This affirmative consent may sound like traditional marriage at first but believe me when I say it is progressive and different.

  7. I once had to prosecute a case of rape, involving two students waking up in bed together, neither of them having any recollection of how they got there.

    The complainer insisted in her complaint of rape, as was her right. There was medical evidence of intercourse, there was corroborated evidence of absence of consent (for the principle of our law, in criminal cases, is “testis unus, testis nullus – one witness is no witness), in that (1) witnesses had seen her consume an astonishing amount of alcohol the previous evening (2) the cab driver, who brought them back from a club, where they had met for the first time deponed he had had to help both of them up the front steps, one at a time and (3) her flat-mate could speak to “de recenti” distress, when the complainer ran into her room in the morning. How they made it up to the apartment on the second floor is a mystery, never mind the sequel.

    So, I drew the indictment, “you did assault (the complainer), residing there, and while she was asleep or unconscious under the influence of alcohol and incapable of giving or withholding consent, did lie on top of her and did rape her” Our case was that she was bereft of her faculties and the pannel must have known it.

    The defence was somewhat hampered by the pannel claiming, plausibly enough, that, like the complainer, he had a complete blackout from the time they were in the cab, so that he, personally, could contribute very little to the proceedings. Their friends at the club and the cab driver said they had appeared happy together, kissing and cuddling.

    The jury returned a verdict of “not proven.” They probably got it right.

  8. I mean no offense, but you ought to be ashamed for subjecting this jackass to the horrors, possible harrowing consequences, and no doubt egregious expense of a criminal trial. Rapists should be executed. Two wallowing drunken pigs, and one of them a rapist? Ridiculous, and monstrous.

    Defense counsel’s job is to win. The prosecutor’s job is to do justice; he has no business going forward unless already convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.

    You abrogated your duty to the defendant and the public.

    • I see your point, but at the same time, said jackass has hopefully learned his lesson to avoid being one of the wallowing drunk pigs in the future, and should he fail to learn said lesson, deserves whatever misery he gets.

    • “The prosecutor’s job is to do justice”

      The prosecutor’s job is to see that the case for the Crown gets a fair hearing. Here there was credible and reliable evidence from more than one source of (1) sexual intercourse and (2) absence of consent. That is the definition of rape.

      As for the pannel, voluntary intoxication is not a defence, but (speaking generally) it may render a defence of accident or mistake more credible, which is a matter for the jury.

      Note that the jury found a verdict of Not Proven; they did not see fit to pronounce the pannel Not Guilty.

      • “If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, “the law is a ass — a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience — by experience.”

        So why wasn’t this harridan of yours tried for rape? According to the facts you laid out, (1) witnesses had seen him consume an astonishing amount of alcohol the previous evening (2) the cab driver, who brought them back from a club, where they had met for the first time, deponed he had had to help both of them up the front steps, one at a time, and (3) she recovered first from their mutual stupor, and so got the jump on seeking out said flat-mate to squawk of desecrated rectitude. Being therefore the lesser drunken of the two, she in fact was the rapist.

      • Please change my final sentence to “Being therefore the lesser drunken of the two, she in fact was the rapist.”

  9. Here’s another one for the folder.

    De la Huerta told CBS News that …the second rape occurred in December 2010 after Weinstein showed up at her apartment. She had been drinking and was not in a condition to give consent, CBS reported the actress said.

    • Such stories make ya wonder at times whether these young women are ‘in a condition to give consent’ irrespective of their ‘sobriety’.

    • But she was in sufficient condition to respond to a knock (or doorbell), walk over to the door, open the door to her apartment, and let Swinestein enter – AFTER – having been “raped” by him before? Rape may or may not have occurred, but if she didn’t get the part, perhaps breach of contract is in order.

  10. A lot of problems in life can be avoided by the simple to understand, but apparently difficult to follow advice of “don’t be stupid.”

  11. The analogy to this convergence of “campus rape culture” and “open borders” is in the harmonic efficiency of the straight white male driver pitted against the minority of “reckless engines of prejudicially-fortified chassis” and the much more fanatical “open lanes” movement.

    Most white males desire to drive straight as a matter of CONTINUING to drive forward…

    Yet, the “open lanes” movement has captured the iniative and the “race track” is blown wide open.

    This makes “good” for those “reckless engines of prejudicially-fortified chassis.”

    And the broad conclusion drawn by a messmadia is that white female is most a primitive creature with a deep-seeded contempt for the harmonic efficiency of the straight white male driver in preference for those drivers of discarnated madness.

    • Changing the definition of an act changes the frequency of that act, and so often serves to move statistic measures of that act. My sense is that the data supporting the story of a “campus rape crisis” is significantly padded with cases of casual sex gone wrong. Campus authorities are trying to curtail these cases without placing any impediments on casual sex gone right, which is why they are so ineffectual.

  12. Good point. My own is that Mr. Paterson-Seymour’s willingness to pursue a conviction was unspeakable. Not charging the innocent is a duty even more important than convicting the guilty. What he described was not rape. He should never have subjected this defendant to the pain and perils of the criminal justice system.

  13. Pingback: Tussling on a Tuffet: A Tale of Our Times – The Orthosphere


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.