The present system just is not protecting women, all that ‘she deserved it’ claptrap, prevents analysis and change is putting women’s lives at risk.

A prime example of of this failure, and it’s deadly implications is the Angelika Kluk case.

The prosecutor’s other task is to remind jurors that male sexual arousal is not a form of insanity, even if the defendant is intoxicated, and therefore all male sexual contact is necessarily willful

Emphasis mine.

I think that’s a very point, and I thank you for bringing it up. For some reason, our culture (and many other cultures – my friend who was raped and tried to kill herself is Ukrainian) considers men to be baboons when it comes to sex. Funnily enough, they’re not baboons when it comes to everything else. Seems awfully convenient to me.

I also believe that, as argued by a female commenter on Byrdeye’s post, that Byrdeye himself may have the psychology of a potential rapist. I’m not familiar with reports about the psychology of convicted rapists, but Byrdeye’s basic arguments that male sexual activity is not willful and that women have the prior duty to deal with that, are the classic rapist’s defenses in court. It was disturbing how many male commenters lined up in support of Byrdeye’s post.

Sorry for the long post.

The prosecutor’s other task is to remind jurors that male sexual arousal is not a form of insanity, even if the defendant is intoxicated, and therefore all male sexual contact is necessarily willful, just as punching someone in the face is necessarily willful regardless of the defendant’s state of mind even if the defendant is intoxicated (unless the defendant is insane). So even if a sexually aroused man “feels” like he is “going insane,” even if he is intoxicated, that’s not a defense against a charge of rape, any more than a state of rage even while intoxicated is a defense against a charge of battery. Also, male sexual arousal, even while intoxicated, is not a form of mental impairment — i.e., sexual arousal is not the same as being sleep-deprived while driving on the highway. In the U.S., prosecutors have to be sure to select jurors who can understand that male sexual arousal is neither insanity nor impairment, and that’s where Natalia’s comments about culture kick in. In the U.S., all too many men probably have come to believe that their own sexual arousal is a form of insanity or impairment, and men have to be educated that that’s simply not the case. That kind of education requires a long-term cultural change. But, in the U.S., it should be possible to select jurors (for at least half the jury) who can be made to understand that the current popular culture in the U.S. does not represent the facts — but it’s very challenging.

Sorry for this long, boring post, but issues of jury selection are the only way I can relate Natalia’s concerns with the facts of prosecuting rape in the U.S.