Pynchme,

'they would be required to show some proof of that, like a sales slip or agreement or witness or something.
'

Not really. It's up to the prosecution to prove they are lying. If proof is readily availble the defense might save everyone the time and bother, but the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt, not the other way around.

I don't know how you put yourself up as an expert on what the community thinks. That's a pretty weak argument, and is a moot point anyway as it cannot be changed by law. Men accused of rape like the footballers were are assumed guilty. Why do you think the whole team suffered calls of rapists for so long, even after they had been cleared by the authorities.

Even in the Broncos case, the girl was assumed an innocent little flower who got drunk and was taken advantage of by those abusive footballers. Notice the assumption wasn't those innocent poor drunk little boys treated as pieces of meat by the girl for a sexual conquest.

Pynchme indeed,

Re:”...sex tourism to Asia...They can't get a bonk unless it's in the context of exploitation of others with less power in the situation ?”

A gender power difference would be a difficult thing to assess. That is, if I hadn’t first thought about it and done something like exploited the ThaiLoveLinks website and yielded to the pleadings of one of the multitalented lasses to come visit. For the purpose of putting your propostions to the test, I would need to take Ms Lumby’s manual with me. However a great fear of flying precludes me from doing so.

This fear has been with me since a top-actor-chasing moonlighting whore armed with a plastic fork, shoved me back into a cramped rest room right up the arrse end of a 747 as I was exiting it, still doing up my zip with my johnson half hanging out. This horrific event occurred on the last of my many flights (a “red-eye”) to and from Bangkok some time back. I remember my mind just wasn’t processing things very well at the time of the assault and much of this has only come back to me since I have had my feet on the ground and my therapist assisted me with “recovered memory”. I suffer easily from jetlag and DVT (now a rewardless and therefore less publicised complaint) and I get up and stroll the aisles of the plane when trolleys are stowed and cabin lights turned down low.

On disembarkation my attacker had the effrontery to stand at the door and wave good-bye to me and whilst doing so she said “hope you enjoyed the flight SIRRRRRR” with a cheeky smile on her face. I stood there staring at her not noticing whether she had scratches on her face, her uniform was torn or passengers were banking way up the aisles behind me and not even noticing if my little pubic hairs were smeared in her lipstick. Now you know where my hatred of some women comes from (yes Ninaf, I am talking to you here).
(to be continued)

Quote from elsewhere:” "The damage to the Bulldogs Club has been incalculable. Our players, their wives and children were abused and still are. The Club lost millions of dollars in sponsorship and was fined $350,000 by the NRL. At games, our supporters, even now, still have to put up with "rape" taunts.

Since Gary McEvoy made his views public last Monday we have received numerous emails and letters from members of the public stating they have changed their minds about what they were led to believe happened at Coffs Harbour and have apologised to the players and the Club for believing they were guilty.”

Given the above, now read this:

Ninaf: “I thought I would ad that the NSW RCC in conjunction with the media and journalism research centre at UNSW (where my PhD is based) is running a program with the NRL to re-educate (or as I suspect educate for the first time) footballers on how not to rape women. Catharine Lumby and Kath Albury are the academics in charge…”

Talk about piling gall on gall! I am surprised this has not been picked up by anyone examining this pathetic woman's statements so far, in the debate.

pynchme:"If a fellow believes that a potential sex partner who has been drinking is still capable of giving consent then having evidence of consent will help to show that. The issue is less about drinking per se, and more about retaining the capacity to give consent."

So if a woman is under the influence of any kind of mind-altering substance or in any other kind of disinhibitory situation, she may not have sex? What a wowserish position.

What then of a man? Is he also prohibited from having sex under those conditions? When I was a young bloke, I'd never have got laid without a bit of Dutch courage of some kind.

What happens if they're both under the weather? Is he still responsible, while she can have her fling in the knowledge she can claim she was raped if it goes wrong or she gets some post-coital second-thoughts?

Antiseptic: This is an interesting article written by a man on issues of consent:

http://www.blognosh.com/2008/07/the-opposite-of/

I understand what you're saying about how muddled things can get; but they won't be any more grey than they are now.

Sex between people who've been drinking isn't "prohibited". I don;t think the law does or could do such a thing.

Apart from all the legal biz; one thing I've never understood is how anyone can engage in sexual intimacy with anyone who was apparently repelled by the idea when sober. You or somebody posted about women regretting sex in the morning; but we have all heard jokes about men who had buyer's remorse haven't we. It would be just awful (I think, anyway) to be the object of someone else's regret.

Roscop it's interesting that you identify some woman-hatred in yourself and that you relate a traumatic event. Sounds awful - how though does that translate to a hatred of feminism? Wouldn't you be opposed to rape and predation ? How does stopping laws and action that aims to prevent predation and protect victims of violence help you or people who share similar experiences ?

Houellebecq: <"I don't know how you put yourself up as an expert on what the community thinks...">

I don't.

<"...juror judgements in rape trials are influenced more by the attitudes, beliefs and biases about rape which jurors bring with them into the courtroom than by the objective facts presented, and that stereotypical beliefs about rape and victims of it still exist within the community...

...jurors may query a claim of non-consent if a complainant did not verbalise it or physically resist. Jurors may also question how a defendant could reasonably be expected to know that the complainant was not consenting if she gave no overt sign that she was not consenting...">

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi344t.html