Here Are All the ‘Privileges’ I’ve Experienced as a Survivor of Sexual Assault


Content note: This article contains a graphic description of sexual assault.

Recently, the Washington Post published a column called “Colleges Become the Victims of Progressivism” by well-known conservative George Will. Based on the headline, it would be reasonable to expect that Will was going to counter progressive assertions that ballooning administrative costs have caused the price tag of college to go up astronomically or that education inflation has devalued undergraduate degrees.

But Will did not address anything truly related to higher education. Instead, he spent the entire column railing against efforts to curb rape on college campuses. He claims that such efforts make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges,” are “excruciating” for colleges and universities, and as a result “victims proliferate.”

Like most publications of some repute, the Washington Post does not typically print opinion that is based on clearly fanciful representations of facts. For example, I highly doubt that they would publish a piece in which George Will opined that all extraterrestrial aliens should be required to wear pink in public. Even though that would be nothing more than an opinion, it is based on facts that are not in evidence: that extraterrestrial aliens walk among us and wear clothing.

If you take away the guise of opinion, what you have in Will’s opening lines are propaganda statements that are absolutely contrary to the facts. For Will’s “opinion” to be worthy of printing, the Post had to believe that there is some truth in the following statements:

    1. Women receive positive attention for being raped. Having a “coveted status that confers privilege” requires that someone else confer that status and those privileges. Someone must be giving the average survivor so much positive attention that we all want to have the label of survivor.
    2. Women want to be raped. After all, anything that is both “coveted” and “confers privilege” is something that women must be dying to experience.
    3. Rape is not the reason that rape “victims proliferate.” Will suggests that the reason we have high rape statistics on college is not because rapists rape—it’s because we have made being a rape victim something that is “coveted” and that “confers privileges.” In other words, the problem is not that rape happens. It is that progressives grant that women have the nerve to talk about it. And what will cure that pesky old rape problem is kicking those darn progressives out of university life.
    4. Dealing with rape is so “excruciating” for colleges and universities that the pain of victims pales in comparison. Therefore, we must alleviate the suffering of college administrations even if that encourages rape and inflicts more pain on survivors.

Let’s be very clear about what happened here: Under the the guise of giving space to one man’s opinion, the Washington Post has told men that women want to be raped, that women get positive attention for it, and that the real problem is that women talk about it.

The Washington Post has just given young men permission, if not an incentive, to rape.

Will tries to support his amoral opinion by offering two pieces of evidence. The first are data that he willfully misinterprets. It must be a willful misinterpretation since I am fairly sure I could get a chimpanzee to understand why there might be a difference between rapes reported to campus security and what is reported to social scientists. But let me put it in the most simplistic terms I can: Police do not always file reports on rapes reported to them. And many women are afraid to even tell the police what happened to them because they know how horribly our justice system will treat them. So they are more likely to tell the truth in anonymous surveys than to the police.

Will’s other piece of evidence is a story of campus rape. He pulls selective quotes from transcripts and extrapolates that one story is representative of all date rape on college campuses. The smoking gun for him are the following facts: that the woman had a prior relationship with her rapist, that the woman was there of her own free will, and that she had engaged in foreplay with the man in question.

Since Will seems to think that one story can make a case, let me offer another story of a young woman in college who went to the house of a man she had known her whole life. In fact, they had grown up together. She went to this man’s house of her own free will, engaged in foreplay, took off her own clothing, and even agreed to engage in sex.

That excludes her from the category of a “legitimate” rape victim in Will’s eyes, does it not? And if she talks about it or files a complaint, she should be ignored, right? After all, she must be just looking to get that “coveted status” and the privilege that comes with it.

So here is the story: When I was 19, I decided to have sex with a man I had known my whole life. I went to his house in my favorite outfit—jeans and a trendy sweater. Under it were my favorite matching baby blue bra and panties. We made out on his sofa, and I followed willingly when he led me to his room.

By the time we got to his bed, I was naked from the waist up. I remember being ashamed of the tiny pooch of my belly, worrying that he would find an extra inch of flesh unacceptable. I shucked my own panties and jeans before I climbed into bed.

You will have to forgive me if I cannot offer a complete narrative of what happened after I entered the bed. I know how guys who excuse rape, like George Will, feel about women who pass out during sex—that they deserve whatever happens. So I know that some will mock me when I freely admit that between pain, shock, and blood-loss I lost consciousness several times.

The man who sexually assaulted me did it with such force that he tore my vagina from the opening through the cervix. I gushed blood, which he later licked up as if he were a vampire. He continued to pound me after he had torn me, banging my intestines for what felt like hours and spreading bacteria throughout my peritoneal cavity.

I drove myself to a friend’s house, and she took me to the hospital. By the time that I got there, I was in critical condition. I coded twice before they could get me stabilized. I saw the white light and had a near-death experience. Surgery and blood transfusions saved my life.

You’d think that with that kind of an injury, I’d definitely experience the status and privilege that George Will claims sexual assault victims are afforded. Everyone would believe my story, and no one would dare say that a woman who had been so brutalized wanted it or had it coming. Right?

But the police would not even file a report or record my statement. In so many words, they explained to me that no reasonable jury could believe that taking off my panties wasn’t a tacit agreement to having my vagina ripped and my intestines pounded and the exterior of my colon bathed in semen. As a single woman, I had entered the home of a single man, so it did not matter how much of his bedroom was bathed in my blood, or that there was a trail of it out of his door and in my car. I had engaged in foreplay with him, so whatever followed, even if it killed me, was fair game.

I’m sure the police’s decision to dismiss me without taking a report kept the crime statistics for our city and the campus at a minimum. This, I’m sure they thought, was for the best—since so many people knew about it, there was the risk of the story being picked up by the press. And it is more important to keep the reputation of a growing college healthy than to affirm that it is wrong to nearly kill a woman using your penis.

The “status” of being survivor was so overwhelming that I could barely breathe in the weeks following the sexual assault. I became so popular that everyone in our community knew and had an opinion as to whether I was a deserving slut or not. It was so much fun when women I barely knew asked me who had taken off my panties and used the answer to judge me as a lying whore. And without the “privilege” of having my intestines screwed, I am sure that I would never have married my ex-boyfriend a scant four months later just so that I could leave the area.

George Will is right. Throughout my life, my status as survivor has afforded me any number of privileges. For example, I had the privilege of having preterm labor and miscarriages because the assault compromised my cervix. I had the privilege of having my babies by cesarean section. And the surgery that I needed a couple of years ago to fix the long-term consequences of the assault on my body was truly a privilege—it gave me the status of being temporarily unemployable.

Who wouldn’t get in line for that?

There was also the privilege of having my attack brought into a custody hearing as evidence that I couldn’t possibly be stable. You see, the worse the assault, the less capable the survivor is of being a sane and judicious person.

And it was so helpful when I reported that a fellow teacher’s assistant was publicly rating the hotness of students in his classes. I was fortunate enough to have people in power who knew my history, so I was privileged to be informed that my history precluded me from seeing that a would-be professor needed to be given a pass for his early attempts at sexual harassment.

I cannot tell you how many jobs I’ve gotten thanks to my sexual assault; when I’ve needed to explain why I dropped out of college the first time, everyone has applauded me and shoved me to the front of the hiring line.

In truth, the times that I’ve lied, I’ve reeked of shame so badly that I’ve been forced to learn to tell my story even when it really, really hurts. It is because of the privilege of shame and fear that I have not applied for jobs because I knew someone in the administration knew about the sexual assault.

Contrary to Will’s assertions, I have never encountered a trigger warning in a college classroom, but I’m sure they must be present in some. I’m sure it must be a horrible inconvenience for a professor who has to insert a boilerplate line into a syllabus, and it must be annoying to read such a warning if you, as a student, have no such triggers. Surely that pain and annoyance outweighs the risk of a PTSD relapse for students who have been assaulted.

After all, an environmentally based disease like PTSD could not possibly require any accommodations. We should just tell survivors of wars, murder attempts, and rape to suck it up like the people who have to bounce their wheelchairs up and down steps. Oh, many buildings have ramps and other accessible features now, you say? But surely we shouldn’t offer comparable accommodations to people with mental illnesses, especially those caused by violence. I’m sure veteran’s groups would agree.

For more than a decade, I have been working or studying on college campuses. And I can say that, as George Will asserts, sexual assault victims who report being victimized get all sorts of privileges. They get special tutors who sit with them during tests. Their papers are practically written for them, and they barely have to show up to class.

Wait, sorry, those are athletes I’m thinking of.

I remember one class where we were discussing an issue related to sexual assault, and a woman was so rattled by the discussion that she confessed to having been the victim of a recent sexual assault. Let me tell you how many people lined up to escort her to a counselor, to make sure the assault was reported to campus police.

Nobody. That’s how many people did that.

But there must have been a huge payoff in the status she was afforded. Who doesn’t want to be known as a “crazy bomb” that could go off at any second?

Then there was the case of the sexual predator who worked in my high school. I remember that incident well since I was the one who finally reported his crimes, even though they had been going on for more than a decade. People in that community practically held a parade in honor of the bravery that the survivors showed in coming forward. And I cannot tell you how much my status improved as the person who ratted.

In reality, I have been humiliated, blamed, and faced with death threats.

A few years ago, I received a rape and death threat against my daughter so gruesome and personal that I have felt obligated to write under a pseudonym since.

The truth is that George Will is lying. There is no privilege or status granted to those who have been sexually assaulted. We are counted as liars or trouble-makers. We become the objects of gossip, attacks, and other people’s projected shame.

I am someone who has born witnessed to and been a victim of the kind of a sexual assault that Will tacitly condones. And without an ounce of sarcasm, I can say that it has given me “a coveted status that confers privileges”—so long as the status you covet is that of advocate, and the privilege you long for is to help others.

I can scarcely imagine what my life would be if I had not been sexually assaulted. I’m sure that I would not have been someone who gives other women and men a safe space to talk about their experiences of sexual harassment, abuse, and assault. I probably would not have held the hands of women while they tentatively tried to tell someone in authority what happened to them. And as a result, it is unlikely that I would have had the opportunity to truly see and appreciate the resiliency and strength of my fellow survivors.

Most of all, being a survivor has given me the status of a person who gives a damn, and it has conferred on me the privilege of being a person who cannot ignore her conscience. I cannot stand by idly while people like George Will tell America that our real problem is that we are trying to make a safe place for women to talk about sexual assault, when I know that the real problem is that people like George Will have created a place in which sexual assault can happen.

Will lied, and with those lies he gave his tacit permission for college-aged men to rape. For this gross breach in the most basic rules of journalism, he deserves to be fired from any and all media-related jobs. And I, for one, will judge the ethics of media outlets by how they respond to his “opinion.”

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • bitchybitchybitchy

    I’m so sorry that you suffered this horrific assault. As for George Will and the Washington Post, the newspaper has made a conscious effort to become more centrist on its Op-ed pages in recent years. I hope that they get a lot of criticism for allowing Will to vent his ignorance.

  • TMavrogeorge

    I am sorry for your experience, but Will is not condoning or minimizing rape.

    • L-dan

      Really? Putting sexual assault in scare quotes two paragraphs in, while equating sexual assault and rape isn’t minimizing rape? Putting survivors in scare quotes isn’t minimizing?

      Saying that victimhood, in the arena of sexual assault and rape, somehow confers status and privilege isn’t minimizing both? Oh, and let’s note that he offers no evidence that victims are somehow offered any benefits due to their victimhood.

      “Supposed campus epidemic of rape,” isn’t a phrase designed to dismiss accounts of campus rape?

      Dismissing an account of rape because in the end, she stopped saying no, isn’t minimizing?

      Saying that everyone is hypersensitive and even delusional about victimizations isn’t minimizing?

      You feeling the need to jump in and comment on an article to say “so sorry for your trauma, but you’re wrong about this thing that I’m going to offer zero evidence for,” is minimizing and downright insulting. Please crawl back under your rock.

    • Jennifer Starr

      Sounds to me as if he’s doing both. And it’s disgusting and offensive.

    • Lynn Beisner

      I beg to differ. Mr. Will says that women covet rape as a way of gaining status. Condoning and minimizing are generous ways of interpreting his remarks. Inciting is more truthful.

      • DirtyShark

        No, he says that some women who weren’t raped claim to have been raped as a way of gaining status. Is this a major social problem on college campuses? Sounds unlikely.

        But does it happen sometimes? Is it true that some women make false rape claims for social status, or financial gain, or merely to inflict harm on others for the pleasure of doing so?

        Of course its true. There are numerous well-known examples. The ones involving athletes (the Duke lacrosse team; Brian Banks) get a lot of press, but fake rape claims are hardly rare.

        When I was at Columbia, the leader of the group seeking to change the university’s sexual assault policy often publicly told the sad story of her sexual assault and how the university had not been sympathetic to her story. The university could not, of course, respond to that directly. Later, the man she accused came forward, and a very different story emerged, later confirmed by their friends. When the assault took place she had been dating the alleged rapist for six months; the assault took place within six feet of her roommate; she continued to date the alleged assailant for nine months *after* the assault; and she filed her complaint with the university a month or two after their rather nasty breakup. Now, is it *possible* that the woman really was sexually assaulted? Sure. But its far more likely that she made the accusation to retaliate over the breakup, and continued to tell and exaggerate the story because of the truly extraordinary amount of prestige she obtained as the leader of that student group. She was national news!

        • Emma Campbell

          the instance of fake reporting with rape and sexual assault is completely in line with fake reporting of all other personal injury crimes. The media however seems to love the fake rape stories as it plays into rape apology narrative.

          • DirtyShark

            I think part Will’s point is that because of politics this lie is becoming more common on college campuses than other personal injury lies. I have no idea if that’s true.

            I think the media reports these stories at the same rate and in the same way they report when persons convicted of serious crimes are later exonerated.

          • Diggitt

            You think we are aware of freed rapists only because the news picks up their story? On the contrary–to start with, only about 5% of rapists in the US ever spend a day in jail. There’s a long and complicated chain of events that leads up to that disgusting statistic.

          • cjvg

            Have you actually read the Will article?

            The “example” he gives of a rape that is nor really a rape according to him involves a women who say NO 9as in no consent) to sex with a guy she had a previous relationship with.

            When saying NO to sex as in NOT consenting to sex, any sexual contact that follows after IS RAPE!

            So even the example he gives is in actuality an example of rape and you are still here rabidly defending him and his patently false claims that colleges are over run with false rape accusations and women actively seek rape survivor status like they seek a pair of jimmy cho shoes.

        • Diggitt

          You make our point exactly. She was national news. But my rape wasn’t–in fact, the police were bored with the whole idea. The ER nurses shoved me aside in favor of a homeless guy with a bloody nose.

          We garden-variety rape victims make news noplace except in our own lives as they come tumbling down around us. Our current relationships tend to end–because of our grief, because of our hysteria, because whatever. We are different afterwards. Are our rapists different? Who knows? That old stats have hardly changed: most rapes are not reported, most reported rapes by strangers are never resolved, most rapists do not go to trial, most rapists tried are not found guilty. By an overwhelming amount, rapists for one reason or many walk away to do it again.

          • DirtyShark

            So? I’m sorry but your response has nothing to do with the subject matter of wills article, the blog post, or the comment discussion.

          • Arekushieru

            Funny (not) that you responded to a post that you ‘claim’ doesn’t meet your standard of approval for the subject discussion (which it actually DOES, if you go back and re-read your OWN comments) but then failed to address the one comment that WOULD meet your patronizing approval. Oops.

          • Shan

            “So? I’m sorry but your response has nothing to do with the subject
            matter of wills article, the blog post, or the comment discussion.”

            No, Diggitt’s response directly addresses the subject matter of the Wills article. And your attitude.

        • Jennifer Starr

          because of the truly extraordinary amount of prestige she obtained as the leader of that student group. She was national news!

          Right, because having the entire nation know that you were the victim of a sexual assault is just oodles of fun, right? You are simply disgusting.

          • DirtyShark

            Jen you don’t listen. Re-read what I wrote. As I explained, it was the “victim” who publicly proclaimed her victimhood to the national media. She told her story every time she took a podium, at every speak-out and sit-in and meeting and whatever else. She wrote about it in letters to the school newspaper.

            And it was all a lie.

            Am I disgusting? I’m describing a verifiable, historical fact. You can google stories on the columbia campus around 2001-2003.

            Since my original comment was deleted by the tin-foil hat brigade, I repeat: I am not saying that women are liars or that rape claims are generally false. But *some* rape claims are false. *Sometimes* women lie about rape. I don’t know how often. I don’t claim it is common. But the Columbia story I described really did happen. And this author is also lying.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, she’s not lying.

          • Shan

            Which Columbia story?

          • Jennifer Starr

            He’s referring to the student group Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER). Beyond that the rest of this story is just his usual pack of lies and rape apologism. He’s been a sick puppy for a long, long time.

          • Carlton Fisher

            This author is not lying, and, to be honest, without a link to a verifiable source, I doubt your story about the Columbia student as well. C’mon, Sharky–you’re the one with the moral high ground here supposedly, the one with something apparently invested in this, the one making the claim and offering your own personal experience of a “liar” as proof you’re right–put up or shut up. Where’s your proof? Where’s your story? Where is this nationally renowned liar, and even if she DOES exist, what does she have to do with this article or this woman’s experience in ANY way at all?

          • DirtyShark

            Google it. Columbia, 2001-03. There were a slew of stories in the school newspaper and it periodically broke into national news because of the controversy over the amendment to Columbia’s sexual assault policy that she was advocating.

          • Carlton Fisher

            No–this is your shit to prove. I’m not Googling crap. You’re the one that supposedly has the end-all-be-all story that supports the bullshit you’re spewing on this board–you provide the evidence or you shut your damned mouth.

            And, again, even if you story IS true, WHAT does it have to do with what this woman experienced? And where do you get the nerve to accuse her of lying?

          • DirtyShark

            No. I don’t care about changing your mind. You’re a stooge. I mean that in the classic sense, as someone who does a bunch of stupid things to move the story and prove the main character.

            If you want to know the truth you can google it yourself. Anyone reading this thread will understand who’s rational and who’s not.

          • Shan

            You forgot to answer my question: What’s your personal investment in trying to prove that she IS making it all up?

          • Carlton Fisher

            You don’t get to bring it into the thread with no evidence. And, apparently, you have no evidence, because if you did, you’d be all to happy to simply parade it out and gloat over it. The story you’ve made up about this Columbia experience, which, a this point, I can only assume is yet one more of your pathological lies since you can’t seem to supply the slightest shred of evidence that it exists, has nothing to do with this story, and it gives you no grounding or right to accuse this writer of lying about her own attack even if it was true. I don’t understand what your vested interest is in logging into this board and lying (badly) again and again when you’re obviously not proving anything to anyone except that you may be a raging sociopath. Is this your cry for help? Do you want an intervention?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Were you the rapist, sharky?

          • Arekushieru

            So what, what does the fact that some rape claims are false have to do with ANYTHING in this article? We know that ‘some’ rape claims MAY be false, doesn’t make another rape claim automatically false, as you have tenuously, implicitly and REPEATEDLY attempted to do.

          • DirtyShark

            Arekusieru – what do false rape claims have to do with this article? Are you off your rocker?

            This article is about a George Will column on the subject of bogus rape claims.

            This article itself contains bogus rape claims.

          • Shan

            What’s your personal investment in trying to prove that she IS making it all up?

          • Carlton Fisher

            You keep saying that even though you have nor poof, nothing in the way of evidence, and your supposed “smoking gun” that she’s lying–whatever convoluted reading you;’re doing of the other article–has been repeatedly pointed out as being wrong by everyone here. You do not have a single person supporting you in that interpretation, but for some reason you think you’re still right? Yet you think, somehow, it’s the OTHER people here who are insane. You’re telling me you honestly believe that, as the ONLY person on this entire board who reads the other article the way you do, in the face of every single other person telling you you’re wrong, you’re still asserting that you’re right?

            It’s not a BOGUS rape claim. And you’ve completely proved the point of this article–that people like you even exist, much less that you feel justified in publicly expounding on the crap you have brought to this thread, proves the validity of the argument.

          • L-dan

            And you’ve shown that this is a false rape claim how? Just by believing it?

            Sorry, you prove no points that way.

          • Arekushieru

            Apparently, you cannot READ. Because George WILL, HIMSELF, said that even non-consensual sex is used by women to claim victimhood. And, here you go, again, drawing a line of cause and effect that really don’t have any cause and effect. Are YOU ‘off your rocker’?

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, it doesn’t.

          • expect_resistance

            Yes you are disgusting.

    • fiona64

      I don’t know what planet you live on, but anyone pretending (as Will did) that women want to be raped is indeed condoning and minimizing that crime.

      No love, another sexual assault survivor

    • RachelK

      Did you read the George Will article? Because he is, in fact, minimizing rape. Not the kind of stranger-in-the-bushes rape that some believe is the only real kind, but yes, he’s minimizing all the rapes that don’t fit that definition. And that’s most rape.
      Also, the fact that you feel the need to ride out to his defense is. . . telling. Even if you were correct, which you are not, your comment would be, at best, inappropriate and poorly timed.

    • cjvg

      So do you covet being the survivor of an accident you were not at fault for? No why not, after all being an accident survivor really does have some tangible benefits, you can sue for compensated for the pain and suffering you underwent due to the actions of another.

      Never mind the months or years of therapy and medical treatments you had to have, you finally have that coveted victim status! That is exactly how much rape survivors “covet” getting their victim of sexual assault status!

      It is unbelievable that you read this article and all the “coveted” treatments she went through, and you can still tell sexual assault survivors that being told they “covet” that status is not diminishing or condoning rape! It is unbelievable how men like you convince themselves that rape is ok because women want it.

      Please be sure to inform any women you meet that this is your opinion so we women know who and what you are and can stay the h*ll away!

    • http://batman-news.com Mummel18000

      It is writing like the shit Will spread in Washington Post that makes me ashamed to be a man. Responses like yours makes it even worse. Crawl back to your cave

    • thedancingbag

      Oh, indeed he is. Essentially, his subtext is that most “victims” lie and make a nuisance of themselves. That’s horrible.

    • lady_black

      He certainly is.

  • Sarah Warren

    Lynn, this is truly horrific. Thank you for so bravely talking about it and tearing the apologists’ arguments apart with such an enormous degree of grace.

  • JamieHaman

    Powerful Stuff.
    Glad you survived…please continue to thrive Lynn Beisner.

  • Suba gunawardana

    Truly brave & courageous of you to put this horrible horrible experience to good use, & show George Will for the liar he is.

    So glad you survived. Disappointed that the rapist and others like him are still out there raping…

  • DirtyShark

    Would you mind posting some clarifying details about these two incidents?

    Rape is a horrible problem and it is severely underreported. I have nothing to say in defense of George Will’s views.

    The story in this blog posting, on the other hand, defies belief. You would have us believe that (a) you were the victim of not just one, but *two* major, violent sexual assaults, one involving a school predator, and one that left you so severely injured you “crashed” in hospital; (b) that when you reported the school predator, in the years *after* the national school-sexual-predator panic had already begun, that you were ignored or dismissed; (c) that this 10-year school predator incident somehow did not become national news (ridiculous); (d) after consenting to sex later, your would-be partner became so violent that he literally ripped you apart during the act causing you to pass out from blood loss; (e) immediately after this horrific assault, in which you passed out from blood loss, your rapist gladly allowed you to walk out to your car (dripping massive swaths of blood and intestinal matter); (f) you were nevertheless able to drive; and (g) the police refused to believe that you had not consented to the act that literally ripped you apart and caused you to “crash” in hospital.

    I can’t say definitively that you’re lying. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And the story you are telling is so unusual, so extraordinary, and so unlikely, that readers are entitled to have you provide some support before believing that you are not making this story up.

    Applying Occam’s razor, there is a much simpler explanation for your story: You have a tendency to either make things up, or at least grossly exaggerate them for attention; and if there is any underlying truth to the stories you told, it is your tendency toward untruth that led people to not believe you. Twice.

    But I will keep an open mind. Can you provide any explanation to fill in the gaps in your extraordinary story?

    • cin17

      You have a lot of nerve asking the writer for “evidence” of her firsthand experience after posting your own anonymous “when I was at Columbia” story as anecdotal evidence. As for explanations, I’d like to know why you find her story so hard to believe. Sadly, having heard a very similar first person account of an initially consensual experience turning into a brutal assault, I don’t find anything in the writer’s heartbreaking account so “extraordinary” as to “defy belief.”

      This is the deal, many people you know have been sexually assaulted. They just don’t share that information with you. (And rightly so since you’d probably call them a liar to their face.) I’ve heard their stories, and the persons who shared them with me were telling the truth.

      You are engaging in the “women are liars” apologia that is fundamental in perpetuating the rape culture we live in. And so is George Will. Both of you need to sit down, open your minds, and listen to the survivors of sexual assault. Only then can you become part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

      • DirtyShark

        No, *you* have a lot of nerve throwing around callous accusations merely because someone questions a story.

        Why do I find her story hard to believe? Because it doesn’t make sense. Parts of the story are believable, but when you put the parts together they contradict each other and defy common sense, as well as biology.

        I am not engaging in any “women are liars apologia . . .” *Some* rape stories are lies. That’s an undeniable *fact*. It doesn’t imply that women generally are liars, or that rape stories are generally lies. Its just a fact that *some* women lie, and *some* rape stories are lies.

        Is *this* rape story a lie? It is an extraordinary story of two sexual assaults, one involving a sexual predator who operated at a school for 10 years; the other about what began as consensual sex and then evolved into a bizarre assault (he was licking blood like a vampire?) so brutal the accuser lost consciousness from lack of blood — but even when interviewed in the hospital, where she had multiple heart attacks caused by the injuries, the police *still* didn’t believe she’d been assaulted?

        Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and she’s made quite an extraordinary claim.

        As for you — politics appears to have clouded your ability to engage in rational dialog. Its evident that you wrote your accusatory comment without even reading what you were commenting about. Grow up.

        • thedancingbag

          You’re a cruel person, dirtyshark. I think you might be just another troll looking for attention and I encourage anyone on this thread to no longer respond to you.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I second that.

          • Carlton Fisher

            I think Dirty Shark is actually a sick pervert who just wants more rape stories in more detail so he can get off on them. The fact he “doesn’t believe” this account shows how completely out of touch with reality he is. Some people don’t even deserve the title of excrement.

          • colleen2

            I am inclined to agree with you. He is just disgusting. Reading him is like stepping in a sewer tank

          • DirtyShark

            The more personal and ridiculous your attacks become, the more you prove George wills point. Do you realize that?

            And btw – if I’m a false flag, how do you know I’m not actually the author of the blog post? Seriously. And if I am the author of the blog post…am I doing this to make George will look stupid or to make you look stupid?

          • Arekushieru

            No, YOU made personal attacks. We are merely responding in KIND, because we have dealt with your ilk too often, already. Can’t handle what you dish out, when you are inarguably more deserving of it, then don’t come onto this blog, ass.

          • DirtyShark

            No, YOU made personal attacks. Your perceptions are so distorted you can’t even tell the difference!

          • Arekushieru

            You basically called this woman a liar, because she didn’t uphold evidence to YOUR arbitrary, patronizing standards, when you have not PROVEN it to be true and it has been PROVEN that you are wrong, and you don’t consider that a personal attack? WOW. Up is down and down is up when it applies to YOU.

          • lady_black

            Mostly to make yourself look stupid. Was that a trick question?

        • fiona64

          *Some* rape stories are lies. That’s an undeniable *fact*.

          Incidence of false reports: 5.9 percent. That’s not even statistically significant. http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/false-rape-allegations-are-rare/

          • Arekushieru

            And a number of those ‘false rape reports’ may not actually be false rape reports. They may be a result of the accused being acquitted based on how the system is skewed against the victim, including rape apologia and pressure to settle out of court or discontinue the charges in order to not ‘harm’ the ‘reputation’ of the accused further. Ugh.

          • fiona64

            Yep. To my horror, a guy I dated years ago turned out to have raped someone on campus when he was at university (just a year or so before I met him). After we split up, a friend of mine who worked in the university’s housing office was putting together a report on campus rape and told me about it … because, of course, she recognized his name. In exchange for him moving off-campus, the university hushed the whole thing up. Seriously. I felt like I needed to bleach every cell in my body after that.

          • DirtyShark

            If the 5.9% number isn’t statistically significant, that doesn’t mean the rate of false reports is low–it means the study’s conclusion of 5.9% is unreliable!

          • Arekushieru

            So, it can be true that the number of rapes that go unreported are also statistically unreliable. AND the unreliability can go EITHER WAY. Also, please read my post, below, ass.

          • DirtyShark

            Yes, unreliability can go either way. The point being that the study is meaningless! Are you that unable to work with logical context?

          • Arekushieru

            So, if you claim that the study is meaningless why are you using false rape stats to prove your point, in some nebulous manner, that is…? Do YOU have an inability to work with logical context, because it would certainly seem it’s MORE true with YOU, than it is with me. SFS.

          • DirtyShark

            Huh? I didn’t *use* rape stats at all. Someone else tried to use one, and I explained to her that she was misunderstanding what the phrase “statistical significance” means.

          • Arekushieru

            Then what was the point of bringing up false rape claims? OBVIOUSLY, you, YOURSELF, just agreed that they have no relevance to what is outlined in THIS article. You CANNOT make a claim that there are false rape claims and then turn around and proves that THIS one is also a false rape claim, without drawing a line of cause and effect. Are you seriously that ignorant?

          • DirtyShark

            Huh? That comment is too stupid to merit a response. You’re totally confused about what I’m saying, what the other people are saying, and how the pieces fit together. Go re-read everything. If you say something intelligent in the future I’ll respond. If you don’t see a response, just imagine someone standing in front of you telling you that you’re too stupid to be worth talking to.

            xoxo

          • Arekushieru

            No, that you cannot understand how logic and debate works, doesn’t prove ME to be the ‘stupid’ one. Besides, you’re ableism proves what a bigot you are. ASS.

        • expect_resistance

          Most rapes are unreported. “Estimates show that between 50–90% of rapes go unreported. Factoring unreported rapes together with the odds of an arrest being made and the chances of getting a felony conviction, only 6% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail. In other words: 15 of 16 rapists walk free.” (https://rainn.org)

          I’ve heard horrific stories from women I’ve known about what happened to them when they were raped. It’s bad enough that rape injures a woman physically but emotionally as well. What the hell is your problem that you can’t see that. Sadly women are victims of attacks by multiple perpetrators. Sorry you can’t handle the reality of that. Really, you sounds like a sadist jerk.

          • DirtyShark

            expect_resistance – huh? I’m not minimizing the impact of rape. Not in the slightest. I’m not sure, but you may think that because my original posts got deleted by the tinfoil hat brigade.

            I’m only questioning whether the story in *this* article by *this* author is real, or whether its a distortion or fiction the author is using to manipulate you.

            I know quite a few real rape victims. That’s one of the reasons I find this article so offensive.

          • Carlton Fisher

            DirtyShark, who characterizes the man in this story as a “somewhat rough but rather sensitive lover” and injuries that almost killed the author and caused her lifelong complications as being “minor” doesn’t understand why anyone would think he is minimizing the impact of rape. He still does not seem to understand why anyone would think that, even when it is explained clearly to him. If he knows real rape victims, it’s probably because he has them locked in cages in his basement. No one who knows and cares about someone who has been raped has this kind of attitude toward anyone’s rape story.

          • L-dan

            Spot on. Seriously, the deleted posts, aggressively interrogating someone about their account of rape because *his* right to know is more important than her right to reveal only as much as she’s publicly comfortable with, show no signs of anything resembling empathy. Feeling the need to lie over and over, despite having the lies pointed out? That’s truly the indication of someone sick.

          • Arekushieru

            Real rape victims? See, that’s the epitome of rape apologia. If someone says no to sex (all or in part) at some point during the act then it becomes rape. And that IS ‘real’ rape. Sicko.

            The only reason your posts are being deleted is because they are disgusting and offensive. And the tinfoil hat fits you better than anyone else.

        • Zoey0728

          Dirty Shark’s profile only has 4 comments. He is a TROLL and should be ignored.

          • colleen2

            I believe he is the same troll with seven or more sock-puppets. Sometimes he fucks up and you can see the false flags.

          • DirtyShark

            Four comments? True-but the author has only two posts!

          • Arekushieru

            Aw, the poor guy is now resorting to upvoting his own comments. The author has two posts compared to four COMMENTS. Oops.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You created this account specifically to troll. And upvoting your own posts? That’s just sad.

          • expect_resistance

            Your posts are vile and disgusting.

      • thedancingbag

        I don’t either. Sexual predation is complex. The fact that the writer found herself involved in more than one incident is hardly a surprise to me. Having survived a childhood of multiple perpetrators, I’ve learned, as the writer of the article has, that while I was not responsible for the predatorial behaviors of others, I am responsible for what I do with having had those experiences. I was a victim, there are victims in this world, and that term “victim” has become synonymous with someone who is a pain in the ass, attention seeker, etc… And all of that reactivity from the larger culture is designed to maintain the status quo. It’s human nature to resist change. Who wants to believe and accept that many males, whether by design or culture, do not believe that a woman has the right to deny them sex at any point in an inter action , because males, typically, can overpower a female. Might makes right and that is the paradigm that this culture is struggling with and Will, in his obtuse arrogance, encourages because he doesn’t feel like being responsive to women who have been victimized by those ideals. Twas ever thus.

        • colleen2

          You need to take your sockpuppets and find another blog

          • Arekushieru

            Um, thedancingbag is not a sockpuppet for Dirty Shark, though. Thedancingbag was underlining cin17’s comment. Not refuting it.

    • fiona64

      Why do you want more “evidence”? Is it for your spank-bank?

      Given that 1 in 5 women will experience sexual assault in her lifetime, it is not even remotely incredible that a woman would experience it twice.

    • lady_black

      She doesn’t report two sexual assaults. Just one.

      • DirtyShark

        No, two. The first is a 10-year sexual predator in a school. The second is a man she wanted to have sex with. The first one she says she was publicly vilified, the second caused brutal injuries that no-one believed.

        • Arekushieru

          If she went to the hospital where she was treated for her injuries in a couple of hours, how are her injuries unbelievable by medical professionals that are the only ones critical to evaluating whether a rape occurred or not. Why would someone post about that when they KNOW those records can also be verified, UNLESS they were true, btw? SMDH. You people are SO illogical.

          • DirtyShark

            Good point — which is why it makes no sense at all that the police, who supposedly interviewed her *in* the hospital, with the doctors right there, wouldn’t believe her.

            Her story is totally bogus.

          • Arekushieru

            Nope, it makes total sense that they wouldn’t believe her as we have REPEATEDLY outlined to you, too bad, so sad. If you had said the DOCTORS didn’t believe her, now, YOU would have had a point, after all. SMDH.

          • DirtyShark

            Ok-now that it turns out that she previously told this story, and that the entire sex act was actually consensual AS THE AUTHOR HERSELF HAS SAID, do you still think the version here was true and my questions about it were so offensive?

          • Shan

            She consented to sex. Not to having her vagina split and her internal organs damaged.

          • DirtyShark

            Her vagina wasn’t split open and her internal organs weren’t damaged. That’s a new exaggeration she invented when she changed her story. Read what she wrote before and compare the two.

          • Carlton Fisher

            There are no differences between the stories except for the depth of detail. I’m sure she is very sorry that she did not give you every single detail of the trauma she went through so you could drool down the front of your shirt while you read it. The only one here lying is you.

          • DirtyShark

            If you can’t tell the differences between the stories, then you seem to have trouble reading.

          • Shan

            People tell their stories differently depending on the audience. A soldier will tell a combat story differently to other soldiers than to civilians. It doesn’t make what happened less true if the words aren’t exactly the same.

          • DirtyShark

            True, but here crucial details changed as well as the entire tone of the story. The first is a story of a woman during her first sexual encounter not realizing she’d experienced an internal injury until after. The second is a story of was started as consensual sex but became an utterly brutal violent rape.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Have you not figured out by now that enough people have clicked the link and read the other article to realize that your repeated insistence that the stories are somehow different is bull? Do you honestly think repeating the same lie over and over again is somehow going to work? Give it up.

          • DirtyShark

            I think there are four or five of you who have very serious emotional issues and keep posting that the story didn’t change.

            I think most people who click the link will realize that she’s lying, and you’re crazy.

          • Carlton Fisher

            I think you can’t read or are hoping you can keep telling the same lie and somehow people are going to believe you, but even in the face of MULTIPLE people who have clicked through to the article and observed that the story is the same ALL coming back and telling you you’re wrong and NOT ONE person saying, “Wait, I think Dirty Shark has a point on this–he might be right,” you’re STILL insisting that somehow you’re right. Yet you think WE’RE the insane ones? Go look in a mirror.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, we read the actual story and we know that you’re a sick and disgusting excuse for a human being.

          • Carlton Fisher

            You seem to suffer from delusions.

          • colleen2

            You are a deeply offensive and repulsive human being.

          • Carlton Fisher

            What the hell–she even says HERE that is was consensual. Do you honestly think that saying yes to having sex means saying yes to getting your genitals mutilated and being hospitalized. What kind of sick freak are you?

          • DirtyShark

            First, Her genitals weren’t mutilated. That’s something she changed between stories.

            Second, it’s implied in her post that at some point the sex changed from consensual to non-consensual. In her earlier version, it was consensual throughout.

            In any event, since we all agree it was consensual throughout-she wasn’t raped. As an adult she gave consent to the entire act. She didn’t object even when it became very rough. And then she went to the hospital and called the police and accused the guy of rape. And she doesn’t understand why the police didn’t make an arrest.

            Do you people really not understand you’re getting duped here? Are you that lost?

          • Carlton Fisher

            Wow–you actually may be a danger to society. She says specifically that she didn’t outright say no because of the trauma and slipping in and out of consciousness. That you think this means everything that happened was totally kosher means you’re either the guy who did it or an equally sick pervert. By your logic, if I ring your doorbell and you invite me into your house, I can then pistol whip you and walk out with your stuff since you’re not objecting. You’re disgusting. Get help.

          • DirtyShark

            You are insane. In her first version of the story the sex was consensual throughout. It was (a bit) rough and caused some (apparently very minor) tearing that neither he nor she noticed until after because she had no prior sexual experience.

            In her second version of the story the sex *begins* consensual but at some point during the act becomes a vicious non-consensual assault in which she is ripped apart, loses consciousness, has visceral matter leaking over everything, her blood is licked as by a vampire, etc. etc.

            Are you not aware that a woman can start out saying yes then change her mind any time? Well that’s what she said here. Except before when she described the same incident she *didn’t* change her mind. Until later, *after* the act, when she discovered her injuries, and *then* claimed that an act, which she says was consensual from beginning to end, was rape.

            She’s a menace!

          • Jennifer Starr

            No. You’re a menace.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Directly from the other article: “I got to the hospital on the verge of dying. There I was revived with
            defibrillator paddles and blood transfusions before undergoing emergency
            surgery to repair the laceration that extended from the opening of my
            vagina through my cervix. The physical damage caused multiple
            miscarriages in later life and meant that when I was able to carry to
            term, both of my children had to be born by cesarean section. It was a
            contributing factor to the problems that led to a series of surgeries
            this summer.”

            You are a psychopath who apparently believes this is “very minor tearing” resulting from play that was “a bit rough.” You’re sick, and I hope you wind up institutionalized so you’re off the streets.

          • Arekushieru

            We do NOT agree that it was consensual throughout. A woman who consents to sex, INITIALLY, can revoke consent, LATER and still be raped. YOU are arguing that someone who listens to the rape apologia that you people SPEW and concludes that they DID consent to the whole thing based on FALSE ASSumptions can not later believe factual information and conclude that they did NOT consent. This, as the part about the organs being mutilated, has ALREADY been told to you and did NOT change, so thanks for proving you’re a RAPE APOLOGIST,

          • Carlton Fisher

            Rape apologist is too kind for what this guy is. He’s some sort of rape advocate.

          • DirtyShark

            Arekusieru – apparently the rest of the commenters here disagree with you. *I* am the one saying consent can be revoked. *They* are saying that even here she says the whole act was consensual.

            You guys can’t even keep your stories straight from one post to the next.

          • Jennifer Starr

            He’s an MRA rape apologist.

          • DirtyShark

            So the doctors believe her but the police didn’t believe the doctors? Anyway her prior version of the story clears up the whole thing. She didn’t have severe injuries (it’s an invention) and the entire sex was consensual from beginning to end.

          • Carlton Fisher

            How do you get that her injuries were not severe from the other article. Can you read?

          • Arekushieru

            Again, you cannot read. Police are not medical experts are just as biased as most civilians. They can deny everything that a doctor says to their last breath. Boy, you are an ignoramous and a rape apologist.

          • DirtyShark

            Ok – so she’s in the hospital, the doctors have had to rescucitate her twice, and the police come to the hospital and interview her, and the police also interview the doctors, but the police don’t believe she was injured?!?!?

            That makes no sense.

            What *would* make complete sense is her *original* story, which is that after having fully consensual (beginning to end, not revoked) sex she discovered a relatively minor injury.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Nothing in her “original story” indicates a “relatively minor injury” unless you think having to have you vagina stitched back together all the way to your cervix is somehow minor. And she doesn’t say the police didn’t believe she was injured–she says they didn’t believe it was rape–kind of like you, yet another social problem that hasn’t been handled.

            And no where in EITHER story does she talk about “revoking” consent. Stop making crap up. She freely admits the act was consensual from the start, and that she was pretty much out of it once the violence began.

          • librtee_dot_com

            WayBackMachine took a snapshot of this article 2 days ago. Between then and now, nothing has changed.

          • DirtyShark

            librtee_dot_com – you’re new to the discussion. I’m not saying *this* article changed. One of the commeters discovered that the author posted a description of the same event several years ago. Except, her description in that story is different. Instead of a brutal rape, its about consensual sex with an inexperienced girl where neither person realized she was injured until afterwards.

          • Shan

            Um, no. I’m the one who posted the link. The retellings are not as different as you seem to need them to be.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Since the other link has been posted, DirtyShark has been spinning an insane fabrication about these radical differences between the two, repeating the same lies over and over and over again despite not a single person buying into it and the ability of everyone here to click the link, read the article, and understand he is disturbed. He’s also described the attacker as a “somewhat rough but rather sensitive lover” and the injury that resulted in the woman having to have her vagina sewn back together with lifelong complications resulting from it as “a minor injury.” He’s somehow construed this into the entire story of her attack being a lie–completely consensual, not rape at all, not even something to be worried about, you know, despite having to be revived with paddles TWICE. I guess, in DirtyShark’s world, that just means the sex was really good.

          • colleen2

            He wants to prolong the discussion. It is his idea of porn.

        • lady_black

          She said she turned in a sexual predator. Not that she was personally attacked by him.

          • DirtyShark

            You’re right. Now its making more and more sense why no-one believed her.

          • Arekushieru

            What the fuck? First you say that no one can believe her because you believed she was claiming that she was raped twice, NOW you’re claiming that no one can believe her because she turned IN a sexual predator rather than being raped by him? PLEASE, as Carlton says, seek help for your sociopathic behaviour.

    • rlion

      You are proving her point quite well asking her to explain in more detail so YOU can believe the rape happened. The “coveted rape” status is being called a liar, just as you did in your post, and repeatedly being asked to “prove” she was raped.

      • colleen2

        Dirty Shark is a sick, nasty little man.

        • DirtyShark

          Why do you even assume I’m a man? Its amazing the torrent of baseless personal insults that have been lodged against me merely for expressing skepticism about a story that turned out to be false.

          Because I questioned whether the author’s story was true, I’ve been called sick, nasty, a pervert, a rape apologist, a “rape troll” (whatever that is), someone who gets sexual gratification from discussing rape, and so on.

          Because I questioned the veracity of a story that has now turned out to be false.

          • Shan

            What do you gain from the story being false?

          • Carlton Fisher

            You describe her injuries as “minor” and her rapist as a “somewhat rough but rather sensitive lover” after declaring her entire story false with no actual evidence to do so, and you’re wondering why people think you’re all those things? Really? Are you that dense? That seriously believing in your own righteousness in this stance that you don’t have the slightest clue why someone might think any of those things might be true of you given the ample evidence you have provided of your character? If you honestly do not understand, I think it is a sign of deeply flawed thinking–a deeply scarred and sick mentality contained within you, the kind that is unfixable. You are a danger to the public. Turn yourself in.

          • Arekushieru

            You have yet to prove that it IS false. Making a claim that you have yet to PROVE is typical behaviour of an MRA rape apologist.

            Baseless personal insults? There are fewer reasons for the insults you have thrown at women, here, than what YOU have been getting. Don’t play the VICTIM, now…. After all, it’s just attention-seeking. Or does that only apply to women who have been raped? Like I said, you’re disgusting.

          • Jennifer Starr

            It hasn’t turned out to be false. You haven’t proved one damn thing. And no, you’re not a victim.

    • Diggitt

      Rape is such a frequent event that it happens more than once to individuals, and the older you are the more likely it is to have happened to you. You don’t hear the stories–especially from older women–because they have been made to feel so ashamed of what happened to them that they wind up living out their lives in denial and anger. In fact, Dirty Shark, if you haven’t heard about their rapes from your wife or daughter or sister or mother, it’s because they are so ashamed of their own beings, and they don’t have enough confidence in your acceptance of them to tell you. In which case you have only yourself to blame.

      We are now hearing more about rape than we used to precisely because women started opening up. When one woman tells her story–especially in a room with a handful of women she doesn’t know all that well–there’s something of a shock effect, and the other women begin to open up. I have seen this happen several times over the years. What it shows us is how much ALL women have been victimized about this.

      • DirtyShark

        Digit–you fool! The author told the same story before. Except the details and character totally changed. Oh — AND THE AUTHOR HERSELF SAYS THE WHOLE THING WAS CONSENSUAL!

        • Carlton Fisher

          The details are not different from one story to the next. Stop telling your manufactured folk tales to try and give yourself credence–especially when anyone can scroll down, click the link, read four paragraphs, and see it’s the same damned story. I don’t know whether you’re sick, mean spirited, mentally ill, stupid, or some bizarre mix of the those, but how dare you come on here and tell a woman she wasn’t raped. How dare you come into this forum and pretend to have the authority to declare someone a liar. You obviously have no idea what the experience of being a rape survivor is, otherwise you’d realize how very, very true every word of this story sounds. I hope you never have to have that experience–wouldn’t wish that on my worst enemy–but I hope you learn to have a basic understanding of humans and maybe develop something in the way of empathy, because right now you’re disgusting.

          • DirtyShark

            Anyone who thinks the detals didn’t change from story to story needs to re-read both stories. I’m not going to respond to the rest of Carlton’s nonsense.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Say it as much as you want, but you’re deluded.

    • expect_resistance

      Her story doesn’t defy belief. On the contrary. I’ve known women who were raped and had permanent damage to their cervix. A woman can bleed to death from damage to her vagina and cervix. Yes this can happen. You have no ground to accuse the author of lying other than being a misogynist. I know you may not believe these things happen to women but this isn’t the first time I’ve heard a story like this. This is a sad reality for women living in a rape culture.

  • http://www.welovedc.com/ Don Whiteside

    “The Washington Post does not typically print opinion that is based on clearly fanciful representations of facts.”

    We must be reading different WaPos. Mine is regularly filled with complete nonsense in the opeds page.

    • Lynn Beisner

      Dear Don, I stand corrected.

  • EmDash

    Excellently written, well argued, and deeply affecting. Thank you for this piece. I’m not surprised Will is ignorant and in a bubble enough to write something so appalling, but the judgment of the Post’s editors in allowing it to be published is flawed enough to make me hesitate to read anything they publish again.

  • expect_resistance

    Lynn I am very sorry about what happened to you. Thank you for sharing your story. I can only hope George Will would read it and eat his words. He is such a giant misogynistic jackass. I really hate him now more than I did before.

  • DirtyShark

    I think we now have an answer. The author of the article has two posts in total, the other one complaining that the pope endorses rape because it wasn’t the subject of a particular Christmas sermon.

    I posted some detailed questions because of how odd the authors story is. The result? A torrent of personal attacks that I must be a pervert or a rape apologist for believing that a rapist so brutal he knocked his victim unconscious and then licked up her blood would *also* let her go without a second thought; and that a woman who’d post so much blood she passed out could drive a few minutes later.

    The author is a liar. Her story is bogus.

    • Sheila Kotze

      I see no where that she said her rapist ” knocked his victim unconscious”.. and your surprised he ” let her go without a second thought;”… because of course.. since he raped her so badly he must be a killer as well… She says “she lost consciousness several times”.. It doesn’t say anywhere that she was unconscious and then got up and drove to her friends house a few mins. later… came up with that all on your own I guess..

      • DirtyShark

        It says she passed out from loss of blood. And later that she had two heart attacks (“crashed”) while being treated a few hours later at the hospital.

        The story’s nonsense. She’s even deleting critical comments.

        • Arekushieru

          She is not deleting critical comments. The mods are deleting comments that violate the TOS. And the majority of your comments, remain. Wonder why that is, if they can’t handle critical comments. So sorry, but YOU are not the victim, here.

          Also, how is it that when someone replies to you without addressing the subject they shouldn’t be able to get away with it while when you do it, you SHOULD be able to. After all, how does being treated at the hospital a few hours later equate with driving herself to her friends’ house? Oops?

          • DirtyShark

            You don’t even make sense! Do you people read what you write?

          • Arekushieru

            Thanks for proving you don’t understand what YOU write. I am responding precisely to comments that YOU made. SFS. Don’t remember making a comment to Diggitt about not responding to the subject matter? That’s not MY fault, but, again, simply proves MY point that it is YOU who doesn’t read what they write. AW.

          • Diggitt

            Ignore DirtyShark. He just isn’t adding anything to the conversation.

          • Arekushieru

            I don’t tend to ignore people who put out dangerous opinions and thoughts because it’s harmful to those who may eventually come along and view their uncontested opinions and believe that there is no support for them.

            However, I do agree that he isn’t adding anything to the conversation. :)

          • expect_resistance

            Completely agree.

        • Shan

          Just because she didn’t tell her story in a way you can understand it, or in a way you like it, or in a way that makes you feel less horrified by it, that doesn’t make her story untrue.

          And she’s just another poster on this forum, like the rest of us. She can’t delete comments others post.

          • Lynn Beisner

            I had no idea that this was even happening. Holy…oh my god..I have no words.

        • colleen2

          The moderator is deleting your disgusting trolls you pathetic POS.

        • Jennifer Starr

          Your posts get flagged enough times and they get moderated and deleted. Apparently I’m not the only one flagging, which is good.

          • Diggitt

            Let’s ignore DirtyShark. At best, he isn’t adding anything to the conversation.

        • expect_resistance

          Lynn is not moderating the comments. What happened to her is horrific. For you to minimize what happened to her and insult her is sadistic.

          • DirtyShark

            Am I sadistic to”minimize” now that we know that she was, at least, exaggerating the whole thing, if not making it all up?

            I’m sorry, but it turns out I was right. You guys were wrong. The author is a liar.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No.

          • Carlton Fisher

            “We” do not know she was exaggerating. YOU seem to think she’s exaggerating because–what–it wasn’t, verbatim, the exact same wording and level of detail in both articles? You want the same exploration reiterated over and over again in a cut-and-paste fashion so it’s always 100% identical in wording and description? You don’t think, in the two years between these articles, that she has developed a thicker skin to the likes of you, experienced enough insensitive trolls like you, to understand the importance of being open about our experiences and fighting to get a clear understanding of the obstacles that rape survivors face in this culture? If she DID explain it, word-for-word the same way in the same detail, you’d accuse her of lying because it’s “too specific, too pat, too the same–everyone makes changes when they retell a story.” The author is telling the truth, and I wish she had a good half hour alone in a room with you.

          • DirtyShark

            If we were alone in a room I’d know her identity and I’d very quickly publicize it so that other people aren’t victimized by someone who goes around making up fake rape stories.

          • Shan

            Who was victimized by anything she said?

          • Jennifer Starr

            It’s just more MRA whining.

          • Jennifer Starr

            She doesn’t owe you her real name, creep, any more than she owes you any more details so you can spank off to them. She’s the actual victim here.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Who did she “victimize?” She doesn’t identify this attacker. She doesn’t even identify herself, because people like you taught her long ago that having anything to say about your own rape just subjects you to more abuse. So who exactly are you saving? You have one sick, twisted, messed up world view.

          • DirtyShark

            She accused her first lover, falsely, of rape. The police didn’t believe her, but she thinks they should have. She also accused someone else of having raped many people; we don’t know a lot of details, but it seems that people didn’t believe her story. And she’s using a made-up rape claim to try to advance a political point.

            Rapists are dangerous. So are women who make up false rape accusations.

          • Carlton Fisher

            You are so deluded, There is no help for you. You’re filth.

          • lady_black

            This guy cannot be described as “her first lover.” He was her rapist. She didn’t consent to being brutalized. The guy should have been tossed into jail. Agreeing to sex is not agreeing to be severely injured.

          • DirtyShark

            Ummm… she approached him because she’d chosen him to take her virginity. In her first version of the story that’s what happens and she discovers afterwards that she was injured during the act. In the second version he transforms from her chosen first lover to a brutal rapist after they’re in bed.

          • Carlton Fisher

            In both versions he transforms into a brutal rapist after they are in bed:

            “Suddenly, it was as if something snapped in his brain”

            “the man I had known my whole life was gone”

            “I believe he had some sort of psychotic break”

            “He proceeded to sexually brutalize me”

            “he literally tore through my vagina and then for what seemed like hours he penetrated my abdominal cavity with his penis”

            “He stopped occasionally to go down on me and to slurp the blood that was freely pouring out of me.”

            “I got to the hospital on the verge of dying.”

            “I was revived with defibrillator paddles and blood transfusions”

            “emergency surgery to repair the laceration that extended from the opening of my vagina through my cervix”

            “physical damage caused multiple miscarriages in later life and meant
            that when I was able to carry to term, both of my children had to be
            born by cesarean section.”

            Does this sound like your summary where she choose him to take her virginity, he does that, and then afterwards discovers she was injured? You honestly read that from this? This sounds like just normal, fine, cherry popping to you?

          • lady_black

            You’re playing semantics games. Either way the injuries were inflicted during the act. It doesn’t matter that she consented. That gives him zero rights to injure her. ZERO.

          • expect_resistance

            No you are wrong. What you have said is a cruel lie. You have no understanding of what happened to her and the courage it took for her to tell her story. You sound like a sick sadistic person from what you have posted. I stand by Lynn 100%.

          • lady_black

            The author is a liar and you are right based on what exactly? Minor differences in the way she related the story, a few of which you completely made up?

    • Shan
      • DirtyShark

        You know it’s funny because you’re right, she did tell one of the stories before. (In this article there’s a *second* assault she didn’t mention before).

        Except, her story changed!

        When she wrote about it before, the subject was whether consent was enough to make it not a rape. Because when she told the story before, she consented!

        In her earlier telling there was no passing out from blood loss. No mixing of blood and intestinal matter. No vampire-like licking of blood-in the earlier story he was going down on her!

        I’m sorry but the character of the story completely changed as well. The first story is about consensual rough sex that caused an injury to the woman that neither of them noticed until they were done. The second is a violent assault that caused the woman to lose consciousness and later have ywo heart attacks.

        Do you still not see that she’s making this up?

        • Shan

          Are you reading a different link than the one I posted?

        • L-dan

          *blink* how do you read those two and get “it all changed”? The tone changed as the story illustrates different points. The earlier one, frankly, has a sense of “I can’t call this rape, can I?” because there was consent. I’d argue that it was consent to sex, not consent to the brutality that occurred and therefore does fall under ‘rape’. Here, later, she seems to have decided that as well.

          The overall details remain the same: there’s tearing which would lead to the mixing of blood that you’re noting. The slurping of blood is described differently as it’s processed differently. the loss of consciousness and need for restarting her heart are noted in both places.

          Regardless. Why is the veracity of the story your focus here? The article is about a writer using the broad platform of the Washington Post to write an article minimizing rape and sexual assault while making it sound like we shouldn’t be expending any effort to address these issues because it creates some mythical victim privilege.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Dirty Shark would like to focus on whether the story is true or not so he can continue to get attention and more material for his spank bank. What he’s really waiting for is someone who comes along and says, “When I was raped….” and goes into their story to show how the situations are similar so he can whack a few out, gum up his keyboard, and otherwise satisfy himself, because he is a soulless prig with no empathy for anyone. And yeah, maybe that’s a “personal attach” DS, but I think it’s more along the line so of “it ain’t mean if it’s true.”

          • DirtyShark

            The change isn’t just to tone, its to the nature of the act and her injuries.

            Version 1: Her first sexual experience was consensual from beginning to end, but perhaps a bit rough. He often went down on her, not noticing that there was some blood mixed in (which was perhaps to be somewhat expected since they both knew she had been a virgin). She experienced a minor injury during the encounter that neither of them noticed (she didn’t understand because it was her first time) until after. That isn’t rape by any definition.

            Version 2: The encounter began consensual but escalated into an attack so brutal she passed out repeatedly. Blood and visceral matter leaked everywhere. He licked it up like a vampire. The blood loss was so great she fell unconscious and had two heart attacks at the hospital. Its implied that consent must have been revoked at some point during the act.

            Those are obviously totally different stories.

          • Carlton Fisher

            YOUR story has changed. You said she states in this “version” that she revoked consent, but now you simply state that she “implied” it was revoked, because it’s been hammered at you again and again that you’re full of crap. Again, an injury that requires having your vagina stitched back up all the way to your cervix and later causes miscarriages and the need for c-sections to deliver children is not–by even the most sadistic person’s definition-“minor.” Both “versions” mention tearing into the abdominal cavity, both mention the licking of the blood, both mention the hospital visit and crashing. YOU either can’t read, are willfully ignoring that they are the same story, are a massive sadist who thinks this sounds like a great experience he wishes he could have been a part of, or just some gross troll spanking himself at home over as many rape details as he can get. You are human swill–if you were in a movie, i wouldn’t believe a person like you could exist.

          • DirtyShark

            No.

            Version 1: He licks up her blood like a vampire.

            Version 2: He goes down on her repeatedly but doesn’t notice that there’s blood, which both of them don’t discovery until afterwards.

            Version 1: She has so much blood loss she passes out.

            Version 2: She never passes out and neither of them notice the blood loss until after.

            Version 1: It’s consensual sex beginning to end.

            Version 2: Its implied that consent is revoke, presumably some time before she passes out from loss of blood.

            Version 1: She experiences an injury, that is not so uncommon, which neither of them know about until afterwards.

            Version 2: He continues rough sex even though she’s been ripped apart with blood and intestinal matter spewing everywhere, her unconscious, etc. etc.

            You really think that’s the same story?

          • Carlton Fisher

            I don’t know what story you’re reading on the other link, but you’re not reading the story that was linked. You’re not human.

          • expect_resistance

            She was raped. What the hell don’t you understand? She almost died.

          • DirtyShark

            expect resistance — now you say she was raped and almost died? In her first version of the story she clearly was not raped. Many of your fellow commenters (who agree that there’s something wrong with *me*) say that she says she consented to the whole thing.

            So some of you read her as saying she consented, and some of you not.

            Hmmm….

          • Carlton Fisher

            Both articles say she almost died. Both articles say she consented. YOU say this article says she revoked consent, then you changed your story to say it IMPLIES she revoked consent. You think she honestly consented to being ripped open to the point of requiring surgery? Women should stay as far away from you as possible. All women.

          • lady_black

            I would call her injuries highly uncommon. I have never been torn from consensual sex, and have never known any woman who has. I can’t even imagine how painful that would be. Bleeding from a ruptured hymen is very scant, in some cases, not even noticeable unless you’re looking for it. It’s never a huge amount of bleeding. That’s a sign of a very serious injury.

          • DirtyShark

            lady_black – A first degree vaginal tear can be so mild the woman may not even notice it. First and second degree tears aren’t rare. (Google it.) This article describes a third degree tear, which from intercourse *is* rare, but the article is exaggerating — it didn’t happen.

          • L-dan

            How do you know it didn’t happen?

          • Carlton Fisher

            Both articles describe tearing that required emergency surgery. How do you characterize that as minor? When it results in lifelong complications, how is it minor? When both articles describe this, how is there a discrepancy? Why would you keep repeating the same lies over and over again? At fist, it seemed maybe you gave the older article a cursory glance and somehow overlooked that it is a description of the same incident, but as you continue to go on about it, minimize it, and insist that it’s somehow a lie, it really is difficult to conclude anything other than you are deeply disturbed. In the original article, she even states, “The room was dark, so I am not clear if he used his penis or a nearby object, but he literally tore through my vagina.” She is not describing intercourse. She is describing sexual brutalizing. What would it take to convince you? A report from her gynecologist? Do you want her to show you herself? That you keep saying, “Oh, but she’s lying,” makes you no better than any other rapist–you’re yet one more part of the ongoing problem of repeat victimization that most survivors face.

          • lady_black

            Well apparently it DID happen, and she was hospitalized and required surgery for it.

          • DirtyShark

            Unless she’s lying or exaggerating.

          • colleen2

            Perhaps it has been his experience that women need emergency surgery after having sex with him.

          • lady_black

            Maybe he’s the perp. In any case, he has some very scary ideas.

          • lady_black

            Oh and by the way, she never says anything about intestinal matter spewing everywhere. You made that up.

          • DirtyShark

            No I didn’t. Here are some quotes from the article:

            “He continued to pound me after he had torn me, banging my intestines for what felt like hours and spreading bacteria throughout my peritoneal cavity.”

            “no reasonable jury could believe that taking off my panties wasn’t a tacit agreement to having my vagina ripped and my intestines pounded and the exterior of my colon bathed in semen.”

            “it did not matter how much of his bedroom was bathed in my
            blood, or that there was a trail of it out of his door and in my car.”

            (And for those who say she didn’t change her story about whether she was raped, this is from the current article: “I had engaged in foreplay with him, so whatever followed, even if it killed me, was fair game.” That doesn’t imply that she’s claiming she didn’t consent to sex?)

            “without the “privilege” of having my intestines screwed”
            Her first story was about what seems to have been a first or, at worst, second degree vaginal tear. Those usually resolve on their own and only require surgery in very rare cases. The current article seems to describe a third degree vaginal tear, which is a very very serious medical problem requiring surgery and the possibility of permanent harm. If you were not aware, third degree vaginal tears do, in fact, involve fecal matter.

            (Third degree tears are not uncommon during childbirth in lesser developed countries without proper medical care.)

          • Carlton Fisher

            From the first article: “emergency surgery to repair the laceration that extended from the opening of my vagina through my cervix”

            Yet you claim the first article sounds like just minor, first degree tearing? Emergency surgery sounds like minor tearing? The link is still right there–by this point, anyone still bothering with you has clicked it and read it and knows you’re lying outright. Yet you’re still trying to assert it says things that it does not say, and now you’re selectively editing text to try to prove your point–text that we have all read and have continued access to. But you keep accusing us of being irrational. YOU’RE THE ONLY ONE TAKING UP YOUR ARGUMENT. Don’t you think at this point, if there was even a shred of validity to what you’re saying, someone would have spoken up by now? You have nothing to stand on here.

          • DirtyShark

            You’re the tinfoil hat brigade. I don’t care to change your mind. Anyone reading this will understand.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Not a single person reading this is agreeing with you, bro. That’s what I’m trying to get through to you–you need help. You’re sick. You’re ill. You have a serious problem which is likely to convince you that it’s OK to carry out a violent attack at some point if it hasn’t already.

          • DirtyShark

            No Carlton — there are 4 people who are obviously emotionally disturbed and can’t stop posting insults directed at me. That doesn’t mean any readers of this threat support you.

            The more you keep this going the more damage you do to your own cause.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You are disturbed. Disturbed and just plain wrong on all counts.

          • fiona64

            You’re the one who’s emotionally disturbed, here, pooky …

          • lady_black

            OMG. Do you think this crap you posted proves you aren’t making shit up? Nowhere in there does it say ANYTHING about “intestinal matter spewing everywhere. That would be in the INTERIOR, not the exterior of the colon. And of course, the bacteria is coming from the laceration into her peritoneum, which is a sterile cavity not meant to be in contact with skin and vaginal microorganisms. You are a moron and a liar. or you just plain don’t understand written English. Take your pick. Either one isn’t a pretty picture

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Fap fap fap fap …

          • L-dan

            What the hell? How can you read the first telling and get *that* from it? In case anyone here thinks you’re arguing in good faith because they haven’t read the other version:

            “Suddenly, it was as if something snapped in his brain, and the man I had
            known my whole life was gone. In his place was a man who entered a
            violent rage. To this day, I believe he had some sort of psychotic
            break. He proceeded to sexually brutalize me. He bit my left nipple so
            hard he nearly tore it off.”

            “He stopped occasionally to go down on me and to slurp the blood that was freely pouring out of me.”

            “Then as quickly as it had come, his madness was gone, and he seemed
            bewildered by why his room, his bed, and both of us were covered in
            blood. I was equally bewildered. I had heard that first sex hurt, and
            that you bled, so I was busy trying to match the torture I just
            experienced with what little I knew about how sex was supposed to work.”

            “I got to the hospital on the verge of dying. There I was revived with
            defibrillator paddles and blood transfusions before undergoing emergency
            surgery to repair the laceration that extended from the opening of my
            vagina through my cervix.”

            That is not “a bit rough.” That is not “He often went down on her, not noticing that there was some blood mixed in.” That is not “a minor injury”.

            You are lying. Hugely.

            So guess what, anyone reading this is going to look at your intent in questioning this in the first place in light of the fact that you are outright lying here to paint a picture that there are major differences in these two accounts. We are going to surmise that your intentions in demanding answers and details about the author’s experience are probably not what you portray them as either.

            As I said to another poster here already, go crawl back under your rock.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Have you read the point where he refers to the guy as a “somewhat rough but rather sensitive lover?” We’re not dealing with someone who qualifies as a human being by any means of the terminology. This is someone that should be locked up in one of the Lecter cages in that dark hall far underground like in Silence of the Lambs. He’s dangerous, and not only is he dangerous, he actually is so convinced that he is in the right and that his opinions are completely fine that he is publicly and openly advocating them. Think about the mindset of someone who reads and article like that and openly says, “oh, he’s just a somewhat rough but rather sensitive lover”–get him off the streets.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I agree. Reading his posts is about to make me physically ill.

          • colleen2

            He is a very sick man.

          • purrtriarchy

            I missed it all!

          • Jennifer Starr

            Well it was kind of stomach-churning–very relieved that his posts are gone. I’ve seen some rape apologists but this guy was truly disgusting and hateful–just beyond belief. Like Fiona said, if he had turned out to be the perp I wouldn’t have been at all surprised.

          • L-dan

            Pretty much.

            He’s got his mindset and is willing to read both articles about a brutal rape, and go “lalala, this is so outrageous, she’s obviously lying!”

            Honestly, I don’t care if she is. It’s beside the point, as far as the article is concerned. The points made about Will’s stupid article stand just fine without the personal story.

            The fact that this creep needs to make it all about the rape, and all about whether or not it actually happened, is beyond disgusting.

          • DirtyShark

            Except that by telling a bogus rape story — and by the reaction from you guys — you completely make George Will’s point. You’re like a case study in what he complains about.

          • L-dan

            The reaction from us? Dude, you’re the one that came in here to challenge someone’s story with nothing but a “some women lie about rape” agenda as your apparent reason.

            Our reaction, when you made your inhumanity and agenda *abundantly* clear by lying about the previous retelling of the story doesn’t prove Will’s point. It proves that misogynists are willing to go to disgusting lengths to make sure all accusations of rape are doubted, and that victims are treated as potential perpetrators of false accusation before they are treated as victims.

            You pretty much prove why it has taken such an outcry to get the problem taken seriously.

            What was Will’s point that you think is being made here? That *some* women make false accusations and therefore taking rape seriously is a bad idea? That somehow, taking it seriously will actually encourage more false accusations? That we should continue the status quo where the vast majority of rapes aren’t reported, because some women lie? And somehow, we here, are making that point for him? I don’t think so.

            Even if we were, that’s a shitty point, and certainly doesn’t justify his whole “privilege of victimhood” spiel.

          • DirtyShark

            Huh? A friend sent me a link to the page. I clicked the link, read the story, and ‘called bullshit,’ as they say.

            I said I’d keep an open mind and asked for an explanation of parts of the story that didn’t make sense.

            Instead I was met with a torrent of psychotic rage, bizarre sexual allegations, and the like. There is something really, really wrong with you people.

          • Shan

            Classic derail. Ugh.

          • L-dan

            Yeah. Seriously.

            I mean, his first set of demands for more information was pretty telling. “Hi, I’d like to demand more proof of your brutal rape for no reason other than thinking you shouldn’t be allowed to talk.” But then this?

            And this guy is the one in the back of our minds when we accept some guy’s phone number, or agree to meet for coffee. “I hope he’s not a closet rapist/murderer/abuser.”

          • Carlton Fisher

            Honestly, I don’t think I have ever conceived of a person this horrid in my mind. Like I said earlier–if they put this person in a movie or a TV show, i would think it was bad writing and unbelievable, because no one could possibly be this remorseless and lack empathy to this degree. Never doubt the power of the internet to help you lose what little faith you may have in the goodness of humanity.

          • colleen2

            This person reminds me of the cop who questioned me when I reported being gang raped at 17. In my experience this is how cops question rape victims. they do it because they enjoy the descriptions (it’s like porn to a certain sort of man) and because they enjoy demeaning women. Just like rapists do.

          • L-dan

            I sort of hate upvoting that, because it’s not really a ‘like’. More like, ‘yeah, so true’. But ugh these people, and this world.

          • purrtriarchy

            Yep. And I believe that during witch trials, in the past, pervs were inordinately interested in anything sexual.

          • catseye

            You’re absolutely right. I have read quite a bit about the Burning Times (as we Paganfolks refer to the witch hunts) and some of the appalling cr@p they perpetrated would turn your stomach.

          • DirtyShark

            Carlton, carlton, carlton – you have to filter the words of an unreliable narrator. Read the first article without the second. It’s a story of sex by a sexually inexperienced girl. The man bites her nipple and goes down on her a lot. She finds him a totally changed person during the act, but he reverts after its over.

            That sounds exactly like how an extraordinarily naive, sheltered girl with a distorted view of sex might describe her first encounter.

            Add into it that neither of them realized she was injured until the act was over… and yeah, “rough but rather sensitive” sounds about right. This guy wasn’t brutal at all, according to her.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Your recounting of the story leaves out her reference to his psychotic break, that he did not “bite her nipple” but almost bit it OFF, that she had to be revived TWICE with a defibrillator, and that she had wounds that have led to lifelong complications in her ability to carry a child to term and made it impossible for her to give a natural birth. Where the hell did you learn to read? Where, in ANY of that does he come of as “sensitive?” The paddles? Having her vagina stitched back together? And your original words were “somewhat rough,” yet now you’re choosing to revise them? She’s not an “unreliable narrator.” This isn’t a Victorian novel. And you’ve passed the realm of being an apologist and skipped right to being an advocate.

          • DirtyShark

            I don’t believe he almost bit it off. I think he bit it hard and she has a juvenile view of sex.

            I am skeptical whether she had to be revived with a defibrilator. To met its a question of biology. Given her initial description of the nature of her injuries, it seems unlikely that she would have had a heart attack hours later. But maybe its possible.

            More particularly, she sometimes seems to describe a 1st or 2d degree vaginal tear, and sometimes a 3d or 4th degree. Its difficult to imagine a 1st or 2d requiring defibrilation. But if it was 3d or 4th then her description of the incident itself doesn’t make any sense.

            So my conclusion is that if there’s any truth to this at all, its a highly exaggerated description of sex and injuries by someone with a naive, juvenile understanding of intercourse.

          • L-dan

            Awesome. You believe her descriptions are all highly exaggerated based on no evidence whatsoever. Yet, you’re not minimizing rape and sexual assault? Oh no, you’re just calling bullshit where you see it.

            You are so full of bullshit your eyes are brown, now wonder you see it god damn everywhere.

          • L-dan

            You are fucked up. I already quoted all of this at you. If you think anyone is buying your condescending chiding here, you’re sadly mistaken.

            According to her, she was brutalized. In her own words in that article, she says that.

            And yet you continue to lie and say ‘no, no…she was actually describing something rough but sensitive.”

            Look at the comments on that article. Look at the comments here. *NOBODY* is buying what you’re selling. At this point, you’re just trolling to piss people off and get a bigger response. Enjoy the ban I’m sure you’ll see shortly.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You are a real sicko.

          • Lynn Beisner

            You hit the nail on the head. I wrote the two stories coming from two very different places. When I wrote the first one, I was still having a hard time using the word rape. By the second one, I had accepted that it was rape. I gave permission for sex, not to be brutalized.

        • colleen2

          We do not believe she is making this up. We believe you are a rape troll

          • DirtyShark

            A “rape troll”? Do you realize how ridiculous you sound?

          • Carlton Fisher

            She’s calling you out for exactly what you sound like. Do YOU realize how ridiculous you sound?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Do you prefer rape apologist instead?

          • DirtyShark

            I’m not apologizing for any rape. I started out questioning whether *this* rape story was true or false because it didn’t sound true. I later learned that she told a different version of the same incident with contradictory facts, which makes clear that the author was not, in fact, raped — even she says she wasn’t raped.

            So it turned out I was right all along – the author of the post wasn’t raped.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No you’re not right. You’ve never been right.

          • Carlton Fisher

            The author never says she wasn’t raped. She says, as many rape survivors experience, that she had trouble thinking of it as rape because it was not rape in the way we are classically taught. You aren’t right. You’re just a sadistic with a selective level of reading comprehension.

          • DirtyShark

            She does she she wasn’t raped. She says it was consensual from beginning to end. She never objected or said no at any point during a sex act that she initiated. I agree, of course, that consent can be revoked. But she never says she revoked consent–in fact she says the opposite.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Yes, she says that in both pieces, She also acknowledges that in the midst of the act, she was not in any position o be ABLE to revoke consent because of the pain from the injuries she was suffering, and I don’t care if she spent the entire time begging for him to hurt her as much as possible–any man with even a shred of decency and common sense knows to STOP when he’s torn a woman’s vagina open through to her abdominal cavity. If you honestly think you can justify this as being “fine,” I seriously think you should be locked away, perhaps euthanized.

          • DirtyShark

            No. In the first version she *does* *not* say she was unable to revoke consent. She says she didn’t realize, because it was her first time, that she was being injured.

            In the first version neither of them know she has a tear. In the second version they both do.

            Is this “fine”? The second story is a brutal awful rape by a sexual sadist who may have had a psychotic break. The first story is a very sad loss-of-virginity tale, in which the woman realizes afterwards that she’s been injured, by a somewhat rough but also rather sensitive lover. But it isn’t a rape.

          • Carlton Fisher

            “Somewhat rough but rather sensitive lover?” You really just typed that? That’s what you actually read when you read that story? I don’t think i have ever been this infuriated by someone in my life. I can’t think of anything that should happen to you that would be horrible enough–there is no level of suffering that you could possibly suffer that even approaches what you actually deserve. No wonder you hide behind an internet alias.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he’s a registered offender of some sort.

          • fiona64

            At a minimum. I am beginning to think he’s the perp, to be honest.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yeah, that’s what I’m thinking too.

          • expect_resistance

            No it was rape. What the hell is wrong with you?

            She was raped and almost DIED from being raped!

          • Jennifer Starr

            I read both stories. You are lying your ass off.

          • expect_resistance

            Oh bullshit!

          • expect_resistance

            It doesn’t sound ridiculous at all.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style-blog/wp/2014/02/12/online-trolls-are-just-everyday-sadists-according-to-new-paper/
            In yet another instance of science belatedly confirming what common sense has already told us, a new paper from researchers at three Canadian universities concludes that Internet trolls aren’t just mean — they’re sadists and psychopaths.

          • expect_resistance

            I believe Lynn. I stand by her 100%

          • Jennifer Starr

            I second that. I stand by her as well.

          • expect_resistance

            I admire her for telling her story. It takes a lot of courage and I think she speaks for other women too.

          • thedancingbag

            Put you sock puppet away. Your unstable rage is not helpful.

          • fiona64

            What sock puppet? You mean the one you made up, DirtyShark? colleen2 has been posting here for years. You, not so much.

          • colleen2

            My apologies for not following your contributions closely enough. Apparently I found the intent of your writing unclear. It must have been my unhelpful “unstable rage”. I have no sock puppets or any idea what you’re talking about.

          • thedancingbag

            You referred to me as a sock puppet in a reply that you sent to me. I didn’t know what the reference meant. I thought it might have something to do with someone who has used role playing in therapy, I thought you intended to be offensive to the idea of someone getting help in working through the psychological discomfort of surviving sexual abuse/sexual assault. I now realize that you were accusing me of being an impostor who was trying to be hurtful towards the writer of this article. I looked isock puppet up on Wikipedia, now I get it. I am not an impostor trying to undermine the writer’s point. I support and applaud her courage and find “Dirtyshark” to be, at best, as thoughtless and arrogant as George Will, or worse.

        • Shan

          “Do you still not see that she’s making this up?”

          What’s your personal investment in trying to prove that she IS making it all up, wherever she’s posted her story?

          While you do that, let’s just go there with your idea (and The Other McCain’s) that she IS making it up.

          Why would she do it? She has not accused anybody in specific of a crime, not accused anybody in specific of covering it up and not accused anybody in specific of ignoring it. She uses a pseudonym, thereby giving herself AND all the people she has so far NOT accused of anything at all the same amount of privacy and/or anonymity she has given herself. Who has been harmed by her telling her story whether it’s true or not?

          If it’s not a true story and she’s doing it for attention, she’s hardly worse than the garden variety internet troll, just more complicated. Internet trolls create online identities and histories all the time, sometimes multiple personalities. They can usually only keep track of them for short periods of time (if RHRC repeat trolls are any indication) but even if Lynn Beisner IS a long-term internet persona (and I’m not saying she is)…SO WHAT?

          Because in this true-or-not story, there are so many places for SO many rape survivors to identify with and therefore be able to share or just re-consider their own stories themselves, so that they can gain whatever relief or happiness in their lives that they need – even just a lessening of their pain for a while.

          Now. I’ve said why I don’t CARE whether or not she’s making it up. Please tell me why it’s so important to you to prove that she IS.

          • DirtyShark

            Why is she making it up? Well lets start with the fact that now that we’ve seen her prior story, if she didn’t make the whole thing up then at a minimum here she grossly exaggerated the nature of her injuries and the brutality of the attack.

            Why did she do it? Could be any number of reasons — this is an anonymous author on the internet. “She” could be a he. She could be psychotic. She could have PTSD or other emotional problems that cause her to have distorted perceptions or memories. She could be seeking attention and sympathy. She could be “catfish.” Who knows? What we do know is that her story is bogus.

          • Shan

            I already said I didn’t care whether she’d made it up or not because it gives a lot of other rape survivors a place to go to discuss their own experiences.

            You forgot to answer my question: What’s your personal investment in trying to prove that she IS making it all up?

          • Carlton Fisher

            “We” do not “know” any such thing that her story is bogus, but what we can easily tell is that your entire explanation of her supposed motive for lying is 100% horseshit.

            What point would there be in a “he” writing this? This doesn’t create a motive that just further illustrates that you’re nuts.

            There are no discrepancies between the two stories aside from the level of detail and your own warped mind.

            She’s not going to get “attention” or “sympathy” is she’s posting under a pseudonym.

            This isn’t even within a million miles of being “catfishing.”

            And, honestly, I never thought I would ever think this about anyone, but I rescind my comment earlier about not wishing something like this to happen to you–maybe you’d actually learn a little empathy if you had to go through this system and see how rape victims are treated. I’ll take the fact that it is a sign of poor moral character, a magnet for bad karma, and every other negative thing that goes along with it, including the likely ire of other people on this board, but I do, seriously, hope you get to experience first hand what an attack like this would be like. I know, from my own experience, it might get you to shut your fucking mouth and maybe have a clue about something.

        • fiona64

          Query: are you the guy who raped her? Otherwise, I can’t see the reason for you being so invested in wanting her story to be disbelieved.

          • colleen2

            I think he understands she is not lying. He is doing this for the reactions of the women here. It gets him off. He is a sick, sick man.

      • L-dan

        I thought I’d seen the story before, and was really hoping there wasn’t another in the same vein. Mr. DirtyShark can find all the detail he wants there.

        Not that the story has all that much to do with the heart of the article, which is that George Will is an idiot.

        • Shan

          So he is.

  • jjdoe

    Will is equating rape with a woman telling her friend she got ‘reeeal wasted’ last night, when she was actually studying. With saying she LOVES the NFL, just to fit in. WHAT COLLEGE CLIQUE would celebrate rape (outside of a fraternity)??? What a soul-less man this guy is. We’ve always known that, but he’s really exposing himself here!
    One aspect that doesn’t get covered much with rape is when will it end? Will it be a confusing quickie, with a ride home at the end? Will it be violent? Will the victim get tied up and be used for the weekend? Will it end being shoved in a hole and being buried alive? One would have NO friggn way of knowing the outcome. The fear, the uncertainty, the horror. This is all part of what the victim endures while they have their role laid out for them.
    Beyond that, I can only guess. I’m not a woman, I’ve never been raped.
    I also suspect men have NO idea of the damage they are doing. Or care, at the moment. Some women can mostly brush it off. Even blame themselves. But how can they trust a man again? How do they ever enjoy sex again. With the knowledge that the pleasure can turn to terror and pain. Or just anger!
    I’m not sure how much women really understand this. Especially college-aged – the breeding ground for quick sex and exploitation.

  • Kimberly Devine Brink

    Thank you for not allowing Will’s diatribe to go unchecked.

  • thedancingbag

    does anyone understand what it means when a person makes a reference to a sock puppet? Someone by the name of Colleen2 replied to one of my posts and suggested that I put my sock puppets away and stop posting on the site. I took it to mean that she was insulting me, but I’m not sure what the sock puppet reference was.

  • thedancingbag

    Never mind my post from a few minutes ago. I now know what is meant by “sock puppet”.

    A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception. The term, a reference to the manipulation of a simplehand puppet made from a sock, originally referred to a false identity assumed by a member of an Internet community who spoke to, or about, themselves while pretending to be another person.

  • purrtriarchy

    Remember Mack from another article? He denies that date rape exists because such a scenario is “merely a hypothetical”.

    Fucking moron.

  • purrtriarchy
    • expect_resistance

      That is very eff’d up. I feel sick to my stomach after reading that story and what happened to Lynn. Really it makes me feel sick.

  • daledewar

    Men like George Will (and even some otherwise very astute guys and women) really don’t get it. I was lucky that when I shared my experience of rape with a male friend the next day, he took it seriously and organized a “shaming” of the rapist. I felt vindicated (tho’ “dirty” for months afterwards). But the rape is not something that can be talked about – like a car accident. When a colleague wanted to blame a woman’s entire neurosis upon an assault that she had experienced, I offered my story to illustrate that assault didn’t have to mean lifelong incapacitation. He changed the topic immediately.

  • acronymous

    “We are counted as liars or trouble-makers. We become the objects of gossip, attacks, and
    other people’s projected shame.”

    That can happen, but it’s not the only community reaction. Women who survive and escape their attacker(s) and who then stand up and bear witness against them at trial are counted heroes. And with good reason. Those who commit such crimes are a danger to others. They need to be put behind bars and kept there for decades. Or life, if they’ve hit their three-strikes limit. Without victim testimony, convictions can be hard to secure.

    • Everybodhi

      I’ve known many women that have been raped but I’ve never met one that was given hero status in her community.
      Never. Ever.
      Shame, doubt and mistrust of women that admit to being raped is the normal community reaction.