News/Trending Politics/Community

Brock Turner Only Had Sexual “Outercourse” So NBD, According To His Lawyer

In 2016, Brock Turner was convicted of three counts of sexual assault. One of those charges was assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated woman. Recently during a hearing in front of a three-judge panel in California’s 6th District Court of Appeal, Turner’s lawyer, Eric Multhaup, tried once again to have the sexual assault conviction overturned. He did so in the weakest, most disgusting, and insulting way. Multhaup claims Turner did not show intent to rape his victim, called Emily Doe, because—wait for it—he only had “sexual outercourse.”

Where do I begin? I will apologize to victims everywhere first. Whether you have or have not reported your own rape, assault, or any inappropriate touch or stare, I am sorry. I am so, so sorry we are STILL defending our words, our pain, and our worth. I am sorry we have to read headlines where anyone believes dry humping of an unconscious drunk woman is somehow not convictable. I am sorry that it would take an actual fucking penis to have penetrated the victim’s vagina to somehow qualify Turner’s actions as rape or sexual assault.

But even then, he would have argued it was consensual. He did argue that. Why isn’t it enough that he pulled off most of her clothes and removed her underwear behind a dumpster, put his fingers inside of her, along with pine needles and dirt, and violently humped her? IT IS.

Instead of being happy with only having served three months in jail, having been given an embarrassingly light sentence of six months, Turner and his lawyer are arguing that outercourse is a “version of safe sex” that does not allow for penial contact because people are fully clothed during this act. THE VICTIM WAS NAKED FROM THE WAIST DOWN, LYING IN DIRT. UNCONSCIOUS. How is this safe sex? IT’S NOT.

Thankfully, Associate Justice Franklin Elia wasn’t having it. Elia referenced a Supreme Court ruling that states that exposure of a defendant’s penis is not required to prove intent. Multhaup continued to argue that Turner was the victim in this case because evidence could not prove when Doe blacked out, thus no longer giving him consent to digital penetration.

Why is it not common knowledge that when a woman blacks out, maybe penetration of any kind should stop? Why is it not common sense to pick up a woman when she falls instead of taking it as an invitation to fuck her behind a dumpster? Why is consent such a hard concept? The fragile male ego, the inability to hear no, male privilege, white privilege, and white rich boy privilege all seem like really shitty answers. But for Brock Turner, they all apply.

This bullshit needs to stop. Teach your kids that no means no. No means stop. Stop means no. Teach your kids to respect not only their bodies, but also the bodies that don’t belong to them. Teach them to read body language. Teach them that the only way sexual activity should happen is if all parties are enthusiastically saying YES. And for fuck’s sake, teach your kids that if a friend or stranger is drunk, especially a woman, they should put her in a cab or walk her home. DON’T TRY TO HAVE SEX WITH HER.

What the fuck, people?

Justice Elia told Multhaup “intent is rarely proved by direct evidence” and that there was plenty of evidence to support Turner’s guilt. In 90 days the court will provide an opinion on this latest appeal.

Want my opinion? When your victim, Emily Doe, writes, “You don’t know me, but you’ve been inside me, and that’s why we’re here today,” you have no fucking right but to live with the consequences of your actions.

Shut the fuck up, dude, and get over yourself. The woman you raped is trying to get herself back.