<p>Apparently the rule is actually, don’t get drunk and go someplace private with another person if you don’t want to have sex and you’re a woman. One rule for men, another for women. Because if a guy wants to go somewhere to, say, play video games with another guy, or watch a movie in his room, no one thinks that counts as consent for sex. But if a woman wants to watch a movie, oops, it’s her fault that the guy can’t tell the difference between, “I want to watch a movie,” and, “Yes I consent to having sex with you.”</p>
<p>Actually, there are those who end up with knockout drugs as well, so it’s best for us to remind our loved ones to always be sure to have someone WITH them who makes sure that they get home safely and keep an eye on all food and beverages so that nothing untoward happens. Men CAN get raped as well as women; neither should have their consent for sex assumed, but as a practical matter, unfortunately sometimes there still IS a double-standard. Avoiding imbibing so much drink and/or drugs that your capacity is impaired is always a good and safer idea.</p>
<p>Sticking with public venues and busier times until you know the other person well is probably as good an insurance plan as folks will be getting to minimize misunderstandings.</p>
<p>There’s a yard difference between a guy and a girl watching a movie or playing video games together and getting into a position (no pun intended) that might be construed as date rape. It’s not black and white. Black and white is rape where an unknown person attacks and commits the crime. Very few I think would disagree about those circumstances. What everyone is dancing around is date rape…and there seems to be a pervading feeling that the woman is never, ever wrong. Well I’m a woman and I don’t buy it. Don’t put yourself in a situation where something like that could happen is very good advice. That doesn’t mean it’s never going to happen to you, or that it can’t happen to you or that if it does happen to you you shouldn’t press charges, but you’ve gone along way in protecting yourself by not putting yourself in an unsafe position to begin with and what is so wrong with that advice? That’s not “olden days sense” that’s just “common sense” yesterday, today and tomorrow. I certainly don’t feel “oppressed” by the need to take care of myself and I certainly didn’t feel oppressed back in the wild seventies either.</p>
<p>I’d like to hear a little less of “Tell your daughters not to walk alone, not to wear short skirts, not to go to a friend’s room to watch a movie if the friend is a guy, not to drink alcohol” and a lot more of “Tell your sons not to rape people.” Let’s put the responsibility where it belongs, on rapists.</p>
<p>Common sense, alas, is not as common as we might wish or think. Even docs often try to have an extra person in the exam room if invasive procedures will be performed, for everyone’s protection. By a similar token, avoiding situations that could get “sticky.” I did this back in the 70s & yes, I may have missed out on some “fun” activities but I also missed having to deal with misunderstandings and worse. I turned down dates to go to parties where I didn’t know anyone & the main attraction was going to be drinking because I don’t drink much and really don’t enjoy being around people who have been drinking. I was never at a loss for fun things to do and never bored or lonely, had a wide circle of friends and never even in the position to worry about date rape. I have dated from the time I was 16 until I was engaged at age 28 & had a lot of fun & met lots of wonderful people along the way. My D has as well, so far. She’s 21 & makes very sound choices in friendships and situations she gets into. Same for S who is 23.</p>
<p>Yes, the responsibility is still the rapists, but we still need to help our kids be as safe as they can while leading a full and active life by taking sensible precautions, to the best of their ability. This applies to driving, dating, and just being aware of the environment and that “we’re not in Kansas any more, Dorothy.” Being a victim is not something we want for any of our loved ones, even if it’s not their fault, there are still very difficult consequences!</p>
<p>what I was trying to say earlier is that even though it’s never right to place blame on the victim…sometimes victims aren’t victims. they’re lying or twisting the truth and causing as much pain as a rapist might.</p>
<p>That twisted logic and distortion of what posters were saying in the other thread is equally as whacked here, POIH. If you truly want to undersand what the expression “high maintenance” and “low maintenance” means, ask. It is a colloquialism that you may be unfamiliar with.</p>
<p>Perhaps a better term is what they need to budget to be financially responsible. Same could be said for gays who are in relationships, men or women. When you’re in a relationship and you’ve invited that person to an event that requires some sort of money leave your pockets, then you’d better have that budgeted in your monthly expenses. I have no problem with the term cost because it’s just another term for what someone has budgeted. Just like food, gas, utilities, etc. If you want it, you have to pay for it, and in order to pay for it, you have to make sure you are living and spending within your means.</p>
<p>Every other parent on this board knows what ‘costs’ refer to.</p>
<p>It’s a cynical attitude toward boys who spend money on girls. I guess I missed the parenting lesson that I had to warn my daughters that if a guy spends money on them, they are likely to get raped.</p>
<p>OMG… I never said girls are an item or object! And just because someone uses that term, it doesn’t mean they expect to be repaid in sexual favors because they’ve put it in their monthly budget.</p>
<p>POIH - I was making an analogy that when people are in relationships where expenses are incurred, they must be responsible and plan further out than that night. If they are in a relationship and expect to treat their partner, then they need to budget for that, or they won’t have the money in their account when they want to do so. If I set aside in my monthly budget, money for food, utilities, gas, insurance, etc., and it takes up every penny that I had available that month, then go and take a partner out on a date, but have no money to pay for it when the check comes, then I’ve been irresponsible (and likely humiliated myself and my date). In that sense, consider it a line-item in the budget. And yes, despite your willing to accept it, some people might consider that a cost, or expense. </p>
<p>POIH - you have admitted that English is not your first language. I’ve been told English is the most difficult second language to learn, because of the subtleties that exist within certain contexts (the same word having various meanings depending on the context). So I guess you can either believe or not believe that parents here are, or are not suggesting that their sons objectify women because they allot a certain amount of money in their monthly budget.</p>
<p>This thread is degenerating. Can we all agree that it is reasonable for us to agree that folks need to budget properly, including ALL projected costs: going out for social events (if anyone plans to do so), eating out for any meals, purchasing groceries, etc. It doesn’t really matter what the gender of the person making the budget. It is reasonable to plan that sometimes one will treat others and perhaps be treated by others.</p>
<p>I fail to see how encouraging males to sometimes/often treat females (or vice versa) for the famillies who do so is causing anyone to be an aggressor or victim/survivor. The issues really do seem different to me and it also seems that some agree with this perspective.</p>
<p>teriwtt: Wow! that’s great when posters on CC don’t find any logical reason they resort to this:
You’re a foreigner.
Your’re not a native English language speaker
You’re not an American
You’ve not gone to college here</p>
<p>Get over these and try to provide logical reason to the topic at hand. If you budget for entertainment then call it cost of entertainment. Whether you go to movie alone or with a date call it entertainment expense not cost of having a GF.</p>
<p>The problem is the attitude. When you link the cost to GF then it’s a problem. If you budget the cost of entertainment then you’re a gentleman.</p>
<p>That’s the difference. If you can’t get that then there is no problem with my language ability but your understanding of english language.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Did I mention not to encourage your children to budget? What I’ve been saying that parent and boys with attitude to attribute their entertainment cost as cost of having a GF is WRONG.</p>
<p>You can’t be just more WRONG in this case.</p>
<p>Don’t treat girls like object with a cost tag (High Cost) and (Low Cost).</p>
<p>If you want to budget then budget for entertainment or for food (eat out).</p>
<p>You can’t get rid of date rape problem with parent having this attitude.</p>
<p>I’m not the first on CC to notice you choose to take the definition of a word very literally and are not open to the subtleties of the English language. You seem to be the only one on this thread who insists that because someone used the word ‘costs’ with girlfriend, that they are objectifying women and vilifying men. And that somehow this attitude contributes to date rape. </p>
<p>If this is true, and if these boys are so smart and manipulative, then why don’t they drop the word ‘cost’ (for it certainly must be a red herring to any young woman) and choose another word so that they don’t clue the girl in on their real agenda? It’s a word, that’s all. </p>
<p>Besides, there are plenty of parents who see no problem with objectifying women, whose boys never rape, and whose girls are never raped, as well as plenty of parents who do everything right, whose boys become rapists and girls are raped.</p>
<p>I’m may be the only one on CC insisting on it and that might be the reason that the date rapes are proliferating. Parent don’t want to admit their fault and it’s not easy to see the point with blinders on.</p>
<p>You don’t want to think that’s why you can’t accept. Just because every one say during the night it’s day the night won’t go away.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow!, Only uneducated parent will have no problem with objectifying women. I’ve seen enough posts here on CC that prove my point that “Literate doesn’t mean Educated”. </p>
<p>This is one more post that really prove it beyond any doubt. </p>
<p>There is no way we can eradicate date rape from our communities where parent don’t have problem with objectifying women. </p>
<p>If these parent won’t raise beasts then who would…</p>
<p>I really feel sorry for girls who are born and raised in such houses where parent treat them as objects and have no problem with others treating them as such.</p>
<p>POIH - again, you are misinterpreting what Teri is saying. She didn’t say it was ok to objectify women. She said, there are some parents who do, and their sons do not become rapists. You are being very aggressive on this thread, and twisting what people are saying. </p>
<p>It does cost money to date, aside from going out, there are presents one wouldn’t normally buy. In the last month, D1’s BF has had to get her a graduation AND birthday present. He is on a tight budget, but he still splurged. If he wasn’t going out with D1, he wouldn’t had to spend that money. But it doesn’t mean he’ll expect sexual favor from D1. Yes, D1 is an extra cost he probably could do without right now.</p>
<p>What? I too have noticed your lack of understanding when it comes to the English language but now you’re also showing that you have no clue when it comes to dating in America either. You are so incredibly rude when you imply that parents teach their son’s that spending money on a girl = sex. Whatever country you’re from may insist that $ spent = sexual entitlement, but that is not the norm here. And…what clubs do you hang out at that “boys” have a free pass when they buy a girl a drink?</p>
<p>P.S. Try to read other people’s posts and notice when they put in the word “a(n)” or add an “s” to the end of words, it will make a lot of what you write easier to understand.</p>
<p>Having a girlfriend is expensive, especially if said girl is high maintenance. There is definitely a “cost” to having a girlfriend, and it is negligible whether I call it an “entertainment cost” or the “cost of having a girlfriend.” </p>
<p>If I had a girlfriend, I would budget the cost of having a girlfriend into my monthly expenditures. Does that mean that I am more likely to date rape a girl? Does that mean that I am likely to force a female into a situation that she feels uncomfortable in? Of course not. There is no correlation between these practices.</p>