Talk:Gray rape

Issues with sourcing in the "Controversy" section

There are several issues with sourcing in the "Controversy" section. First, it says that the expulsion was "under the pretense of 'gray rape'". This use of the word "pretense" implies dishonesty on the part of the university, which does not seem to be supported by either source. Second, it says Jane Doe "admitted the sex was consensual at the time", something which does not seem to be supported by either source. AFAICT, the most that the sources say is that according to the judge, "Jane Doe never asked plaintiff to stop or advise him that she did not want to have sex" (this might or might not qualify as consent, depending on who you ask, as the definition of consent is not entirely uncontroversial). Third, it says that Jane Doe regretted the encounter "after seeing him kiss another girl". The source that mentions this is very careful to qualify this with the word "reportedly", and we should follow suit. Fourth, it says that Jane Doe "cited Lauren Kozak's concept, 'regret equals rape'". This is not supported by the source, which only says that "Kozak reportedly suggested regret over a sexual encounter equals rape", not that Jane Doe agreed.

Since this is a controversial topic, it is especially important that we stick rigorously to the sources and not draw our own conclusions, even if they seem natural. Please let me know if I have missed something in one of the sources; otherwise, all of these issues need to be addressed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:03, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree with the pretense part, but the epitome of the controversy is that both side admitted the sex was 100% consensual. In fact, the claim she filed against John used the "regret equals rape" argument which has been associated with gray rape. And from the College Fix source Jane said “I usually don’t have sex with someone I meet on the first night, but you are a really interesting guy” she then told John and her friends she "had a good time". The source goes on to say "But then, at a St. Patrick’s Day party, Jane Doe reportedly saw John Doe kiss another woman “and left the party early, upset,” the ruling states". Can you give me an example how the first encounter was not consensual? If it was actually rape the "regret equals rape" defense would not be used, it would be "rape equals rape". Valoem ^{talk contrib} 16:29, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

As I said above, I haven't seen any source that says that it was consensual. In order to state that it was consensual, we need a source indicating that it was. You say "both side admitted the sex was 100% consensual", but I don't see any source supporting this. I also don't see any source saying that Jane Doe used the "regret equals rape" argument. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:21, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Seeing no response, I've rephrased the section to address the issues. —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:47, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

consented.ca

Website is a "a Canadian nonprofit that educates and emphasizes the concept on consent in relationships, sexual harassment in any form is a type of “gender bullying.” [1] Why would this be unreliable? Valoem ^{talk contrib} 20:03, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

I believe you have it backwards. Please read this. What makes it a reliable source? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Why should this be its own article?

Why should this be its own article instead of a section in the Date rape article? The term gray rape is a neologism, which puts it in the WP:NEO camp, and it's highly debated with minimal scholarly sources discussing it. Because of this, I'm thinking of nominating this article for deletion. If it's mainly supposed to be about the term instead of presenting this as a distinct concept, however, which currently looks to be the case, I can see a better rationale for its existence. It makes the article less of a WP:Content fork issue. And if it's a term article, "Gray rape is sex for which consent is unclear." should probably be changed to "Gray rape is a term for sex in which consent is unclear." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

As for why I deleted the phrase "is a term", see WP:REFERS. I agree that the question of why this article exists is a good one. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I am aware of the WP:Refers essay (I often adhere to it), but I don't think that essay applies to articles that are about terms. This is why I stated "if it's a term article." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:20, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry. I can't tell if this is an article about the phrase "gray rape" or the phenomenon it purportedly describes. The lead and "Terminology" sections suggest the article is about the phrase but the "Controversy" section is dominated by a single rape case that some commentators have labelled a case of "gray rape"; the section has virtually nothing to do with the controversy surrounding the phrase. The article is not categorized like an article about a phrase, although that is easily remedied. Maybe we need to decide what the article is about. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:53, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Flyer22 Reborn, Malik Shabazz gray rape is a concept which is completely different from date rape and other rape terms. It is not NEO as numerous reliable sources have discussed this term independently. There is no term which defines "unclear consent". The article also shows the evolution of the term which was documented in an independent NYTimes article, the article specifically documents the evolution of the term from unclear consent to including regrettable and intoxicated sex. Term has been documented by multiple feminist writers, but above all the term has been documented in a court of law (both academic and legal which means WP:NEO does not apply see Affluenza). Every source applies the concept of "gray rape" to the Washington and Lee case. This is a notable term, surprising the article did not surface earlier. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 06:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Note WP:Refers specifically allows the use of "term", but advises against it, it says refers to is a phrase to avoid, sorry though you are correct that removing term is better, feared that this was being used to push deletion under WP:NEO. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 06:47, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

It's not completely different; the article is even currently clear on the fact that commentators and/or scholars state that it is date rape or is a form of date rape. I've come across a number of sources stating the same thing. It is WP:NEO, and I don't see how you can possibly state that it is not. There is no getting around the fact this is a new term/concept with limited scholarly work to support it. I do not at all see why it needs a Wikipedia article. And do note that WP:NEO addresses notable neologisms in addition to non-notable ones. A neologism being notable doesn't make it any less of a neologism. I also made no argument or indication that term in the first sentence "was being used to push deletion under WP:NEO." The word term is now in the second sentence, and it doesn't make much of a difference being there as opposed to the first sentence. It can make the article seem less about the word, but the article is NEO either way and is mostly about the term. As far as I'm concerned, it's a term article since the concept barely exists independently and is thoroughly disputed. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:31, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Also, since this article is on my WP:Watchlist, I do not need to be pinged to it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

The term was used in two lawsuits, how can that be WP:NEO? Valoem ^{talk contrib} 02:11, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand your understanding of WP:NEO, but asking editors at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia is not a dictionary for some input on this might help. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:16, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

For example, WP:NEO states, "Some neologisms can be in frequent use, and it may be possible to pull together many facts about a particular term and show evidence of its usage on the Internet or in larger society." In other words, some neologisms can be in frequent used and/or notable, but this does not mean they are not neologisms. Gray rape is a relatively new term with minimal usage; it is undoubtedly a neologism. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:21, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Details regarding the Lee Washington case

I believe vital details have been removed from the Washington and Lee case. All sources say that after seeing John Doe kiss another girl Jane pressed charges, this is a vital detail as it shows the motivation for the charges (which John settled as "wrongly accused of sexual misconduct"). Because this has been stated by two reliable sources the onus is on you to explain why the detail is excessive. Do not revert without discussion. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 06:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

It is not correct that "all sources" say that John Doe reportedly kissed another woman—of the three sources cited in the article, only the one by Julianne Stanford mentions this detail. That being said, since you seem to feel strongly about it, I don't mind including it. I've just edited the article again, leaving the kissing detail in as you requested while removing the other unnecessary details. Because this is a general article about the concept of gray rape as a whole, I think we should keep our summaries of specific incidents as brief as possible. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:58, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Why did you do this?

Moved from User talk:Mr. Granger

 – —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:02, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Here, why are you removing a phrase directly cited by the source? Here is the source, here is what it says “Certainly, in the criminal justice system there’s no such thing as gray rape,” said Ms. Fairstein, now a media consultant and crime novelist. She added: “Gray rape is not a new term and not a new experience. For journalists, it may be, but for those of us who had worked in advocacy or law enforcement, this description of something being in a gray area has been around all the time. It’s always been my job in law enforcement to separate out the facts.”, and also “There is a gray area in which one person’s rape may be another’s bad night.” Valoem ^{talk contrib} 07:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

None of that supports the claim that Fairstein "argues that gray rape has come to include sexual experiences where one party had consented to sex, but later regretted it." She doesn't say anything to that effect in the source. That's why I removed the claim. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:35, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

How do you interpret this quote "There is a gray area in which one person’s rape may be another’s bad night"? Valoem ^{talk contrib} 16:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

That is a quote from Katie Roiphe, not Linda Fairstein. Moreover, it strikes me as a reference to unacknowledged rape, not an assertion that regret means rape. Certainly, it is not a clear assertion that regret means rape. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:18, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Unacknowledged rape is the opposite of gray rape, unacknowledged rape is where a rape did occur, but without legal charges, gray rape focuses on unclear consent which includes regrettable sex. Unacknowledged rape from a legal sense is rape, gray rape is not rape. Fairstein and Roiphe clearly are against the subject. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 17:40, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Lets take a look at this edit shall we? For neutrality we must include to opinion of both sides. Fairstein very clearly argues that gray rape does not exist because it is not rape. Lisa Jervis argues that gray rape does not exist because it is rape. When you write the paragraph in that form it looks as if both side believe gray rape is rape. Per AGF, I am going to assume there isn't an agenda here and it is a honest mistake. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 17:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

You say "gray rape ... includes regrettable sex", "Fairstein and Roiphe clearly are against the subject", and "Fairstein very clearly argues that gray rape does not exist because it is not rape" but I don't see sources to support any of that. We can't add our own interpretations of Fairstein and Roiphe's statements to the article—we can only add things that are clearly supported by the sources.

Let's focus on the specific issue at hand, the statement in the article that "Linda Fairstein argues that gray rape is not rape". What she says is that "in the criminal justice system there’s no such thing as gray rape": in other words, the justice system says that cases are either rape or not rape, and there's no gray area in between. That does not mean "gray rape is not rape" or "gray rape is rape", it's a statement that within the justice system, the term "gray rape" doesn't mean anything. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:02, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Read what she writes, "gray rape is not a new term and not a new experience. For journalists, it may be, but for those of us who had worked in advocacy or law enforcement, this description of something being in a gray area has been around all the time. It’s always been my job in law enforcement to separate out the facts", which means to determine is if a actual rape occurred.

Linda Fairstein, who was chief of the sex crimes unit at the Manhattan district attorney’s office for 25 years, until 2002, said she did not believe the article introduced anything new from a legal standpoint.

“Certainly, in the criminal justice system there’s no such thing as gray rape,” said Ms. Fairstein, now a media consultant and crime novelist. She added: “Gray rape is not a new term and not a new experience. For journalists, it may be, but for those of us who had worked in advocacy or law enforcement, this description of something being in a gray area has been around all the time. It’s always been my job in law enforcement to separate out the facts.”

Ms. Fairstein said the present discussion evoked the debates that followed “The Morning After: Fear, Sex and Feminism,” the 1994 book by Katie Roiphe, who famously asserted, “There is a gray area in which one person’s rape may be another’s bad night.”

The prosecution rate for rapes by strangers is “astoundingly high,” Ms. Fairstein said, while date rape remains a fairly new concept. “It wasn’t even a term when I started prosecution in 1972,” she said.

Alcohol and drugs inevitably complicate acquaintance rape cases, Mr. Fairstein said, describing the concept of an alcohol blackout — “a period of amnesia during which the person is actively engaging in behaviors — walking, talking — but the brain is unable to form new memories of the event, leaving the person unable to recall the events once they are no longer intoxicated.” In such cases, investigators must try to talk to witnesses and reconstruct what happened.

It appears she is highly skeptical of gray rape as actual rape. @Isaidnoway:, @Darwinian Ape: for third party opinion. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 20:51, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

It may appear that way to you, but I don't agree. It seems to me that she is saying that what is described as gray rape is sometimes actual rape, and she is just skeptical of the term's use in a legal context. In any case, we can't add our own interpretations of how her opinions appear—we must stick to what the sources say.

If you wanted a third opinion, the process to use is WP:3O. Pinging two people out of the blue, one who has not participated at this article or its talk page and one who has only made one copyedit, seems like WP:Votestacking. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Can you please show me what sentence leads you to think that? When it is actual rape it is called unacknowledged rape, and that is rape there is nothing gray about it. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 21:59, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I can give you the details of my thinking if you want, but I don't think they really matter. The fact is, the article shouldn't include my interpretation or your interpretation—it should only include what the sources say. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:14, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm just quaking in my boots at this threat to take me to AN/I, but I will continue to remove original research from the article. Keep making things up that are not in the source, Valoem, and I'll keep deleting them. That's a promise. By the way, I'm not a big fan of half-complete quotes that twist the meaning of what a person says, either, so please don't try that again.[2] — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

This might not be an appropriate place, but I disagree with the name for the term

What I mean is that the rape part implies rape, yet the definition says that consent is unclear; if consent was unclear, the rape part jumps the gun the same way calling it Gray Consent would. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylenielsen (talk • contribs)

Rating the article

This article is in need of some serious cleanup- I'll make a start on this in the coming days. I'm going to rate this C Class for now following the classification from WikiProject Feminism