Quote :

"his new controversial work, THE RAPE TUNNEL, which is set to go on view at Columbus’ 4D Gallery on October 30th, has come under fire from Columbus-based feminist groups not to mention, local law enforcement officials. The artist plans to place himself in a room, the only entrance or exit being a 22 ft long plywood tunnel constructed by Whitehurst himself. Then he says that for the duration of the gallery’s opening (from 7:00 p.m. to midnight) he will rape anyone who travels through the tunnel into that room."

http://www.artlurker.com/2009/09/the-rape-tunnel-by-sheila-zareno/

12/27/2009 7:12:21 PM

good luck with that

12/27/2009 7:13:01 PM

SAH
WHEAT

12/27/2009 7:13:41 PM

That news article spoils the surprise.

12/27/2009 7:14:26 PM

This is not art. What the fuck is wrong with people?

12/27/2009 7:14:41 PM

Quote :

"I started to think differently about my work. In 2007 at the Seward Projects Space in Columbus, I had my first breakthrough with an installation that was to be the prototype for this current one. It was called THE PUNCH-YOU-IN-THE-FACE TUNNEL. It was the same set-up as THE RAPE TUNNEL except at the end of the tunnel I’d punch the subject in the face instead of raping him or her. The impetus was completely reactionary to the current state of art, and motivated by pure frustration. As it turns out, I ended up breaking the nose of the third person to crawl through the tunnel, an aspiring model. She went to the hospital and eventually sued me. Her modeling career was put on hold. The civil case was long and drawn out and the matter still hasn’t been resolved. To this day she still has unpaid medical bills. The point of this long aside is that all this took place two years ago, and I’m still having an impact on this young lady’s life, something not many other artists could claim about their work."

wow...

12/27/2009 7:14:43 PM

he will rape anyone who travels through the tunnel into that room.

12/27/2009 7:14:45 PM

12/27/2009 7:15:15 PM

hahaha, that's crazy.

However, I've often wondered. I guess I've watched Law and Order too much. But a female who has had several sexual partners in her lifetime gets raped. It should be illegal to bring up her sexual history in the trial by the defense.

12/27/2009 7:15:18 PM

ROADTRIP

12/27/2009 7:16:17 PM

what







the










fuck???

12/27/2009 7:16:29 PM

I think the feminists should also have a competing rape tunnel.

12/27/2009 7:17:07 PM

but is he hot as fuck?

12/27/2009 7:17:37 PM

need to send in someone the size of an nfl defensive end and see what happens.

12/27/2009 7:17:39 PM

So on that night it would be completely legal to shoot the artist to death upon exiting the tunnel.

I may attend.

12/27/2009 7:17:40 PM

Is the tunnel in the shape of a penis?

12/27/2009 7:18:41 PM

I'll do it...I'd get to the other end and he'd be all like "fuck it I'm not that desperate to create art" and ask me to leave.

12/27/2009 7:19:02 PM

Quote :

"but is he hot as fuck?"

lmao

12/27/2009 7:19:03 PM

some chick is gonna walk in there with a knife and chop his dick off

12/27/2009 7:19:39 PM

Quote :

"It should be illegal to bring up her sexual history in the trial by the defense."

there are some laws that prohibit this

12/27/2009 7:20:09 PM

He's probably going to have security at the entrance making sure no one has weapons....also making sure all the chicks that come in are hot.

^I think that's great. I could totally see some girls getting raped and not reporting it because she would be afraid that the defense would use her sexual past against her and say that she probably just regretted the fact that she had sex with them.

[Edited on December 27, 2009 at 7:21 PM. Reason : ]

12/27/2009 7:20:29 PM

Quote :

"but is he hot as fuck?"

dont do it, just stay away from that, but lulz

12/27/2009 7:23:09 PM

Admit it ladies, you have all at one time in your life, daydream about being raped. Tell the truth.

12/27/2009 7:23:58 PM

12/27/2009 7:24:23 PM

Quote :

"^I think that's great. I could totally see some girls getting raped and not reporting it because she would be afraid that the defense would use her sexual past against her and say that she probably just regretted the fact that she had sex with them. "

exactly!! just cause you have had more than one partner doesn't mean that you can't get raped! i mean even prostitutes get raped.

HOWEVER on the opposite side, some girls do wake up, regret having sex, and cry rape - which sucks for the guy.

12/27/2009 7:24:31 PM

12/27/2009 7:26:22 PM

Quote :

"It should be illegal to bring up her sexual history in the trial by the defense."

absolutely not. Imagine that you have consensual sex with a girl who is not drunk, but is a huge slut and has random sex every night with men from the bar you met her at. She then turns around and accuses you of rape. Is her sexual history NOT relevant there? it most certainly is. This one circumstance shows that such should not be illegal. Rather, it should be frowned upon unless it's actually applicable.

But, those who use a person's sexual history only as a weapon against the accuser should certainly be held accountable for their heinous actions.





BUT, this case is a bit odd. If a guy puts up a sign and says "if you walk in here, I will do such and such, then I find it hard to hold him criminally liable. Sure, it's fucking stupid, but you walked right on in there. Maybe you could get him for attempting to rape people before the fact and shut it down right then and there. Case-in-point is the PUNCH-YOU-IN-THE-FACE tunnel. Bitch walked in there, expecting to get punched. Then she got punched. And she is mad at HIM?

12/27/2009 7:26:43 PM

maybe he's planning to rape people with his nose

12/27/2009 7:27:13 PM

if someone is raped their sexual history is never relevant

12/27/2009 7:27:58 PM

Quote :

"HOWEVER on the opposite side, some girls do wake up, regret having sex, and cry rape - which sucks for the guy. "

My freshmen year a guy I knew got accused of raping a girl. He got kicked out of school and everything before the trial even happened. Turned out the girl just regretted it. She came clean when a friend of hers told the police that while she was getting ready that night she said she was going to get laid.

12/27/2009 7:28:06 PM

IN MY TUNNEL

12/27/2009 7:28:49 PM

12/27/2009 7:29:37 PM

Quote :

"if someone is raped their sexual history is never relevant"

sure. IF THEY WERE ACTUALLY RAPED, which is what the COURT is trying to decide. you need to take a step back and think about that

12/27/2009 7:30:37 PM

So how many sexual partners does a woman need to have before she's ineligible of being raped?

12/27/2009 7:31:02 PM

It's a moving average of three per week.

12/27/2009 7:32:10 PM

Quote :

"absolutely not. Imagine that you have consensual sex with a girl who is not drunk, but is a huge slut and has random sex every night with men from the bar you met her at. She then turns around and accuses you of rape. Is her sexual history NOT relevant there? it most certainly is. This one circumstance shows that such should not be illegal. Rather, it should be frowned upon unless it's actually applicable. But, those who use a person's sexual history only as a weapon against the accuser should possibly held accountable for their heinous actions. "

Yeah that makes sense too. It's just you know, a chick who has had lets say 15 sexual partners in their life. A few of those have been one night stands, a few of them she regrets, but she has never called rape. The she goes out on a date with this guy, they go back to his place for some drinks and he ends up raping her. She goes to the police it goes to trial and the defense brings up the fact that she has been with all these other dudes.
She doesn't want the fact that she has slept with all those guys to get out so she decides that she doesn't wanna press charges and the guy gets off with nothing.

12/27/2009 7:32:28 PM

^^^ you are missing the point.

^ i understand that situation. But, you cannot prevent someone else from making a true defense. It's unconscionable. Just like I have the freedom of speech, and I can call you a dirty cunt all day long and tell people you are a slut. It doesn't mean that no one should have free speech just because some people will be assholes.

12/27/2009 7:32:30 PM

and you should probably take a step back and look at what you are insinuating. that a woman who is promiscuous is asking or more deserving of being raped.

if the COURT is trying to decide whether she was ACTUALLY raped, what does her sexual history have to do with it? if she has falsely accused someone of rape before that might be relevant, but so what, so she's slept around - i don't get the relevance.

12/27/2009 7:32:54 PM

I'm going to use this thread as my own personal rape tunnel

anyone that posts after this post is subject to my domination


just throwin' that out there...

12/27/2009 7:36:02 PM

FIRST!

12/27/2009 7:36:21 PM

EMCE don't play ಠ_ಠ

12/27/2009 7:36:49 PM

^5
yeah that's the part that sucks. If the defense has every right to bring up that then they do. The sad thing is that will prevent rapes from being reported and rapists get to go free cause they went after a chick that likes sex.

I mean I could definitely see where if a chick is raped and there is definite evidence of a forced entry, she is all bloody with defense wounds and found naked by the dumpsters if the defense brought up the fact that she has one night stands and she probably just regretted the fact that she had sex with them that would be totally fucked up.



[Edited on December 27, 2009 at 7:37 PM. Reason : ]

12/27/2009 7:36:56 PM

Quote :

"and you should probably take a step back and look at what you are insinuating. that a woman who is promiscuous is asking or more deserving of being raped."

that's not at all what I am insinuating. not even close. Note that I said the sex was CONSENSUAL in my example. As in, a rape wasn't committed. No alcohol.

Quote :

"if the COURT is trying to decide whether she was ACTUALLY raped, what does her sexual history have to do with it?"

you said that if someone was raped, then sexual history shouldn't matter. The problem is that you must prove that a rape occurred. That is what the court is supposed to be fore. However, you are saying that the sexual history should be illegal to bring up before a rape is even proven to have occurred. i think that is unconscionable.

Quote :

"The sad thing is that will prevent rapes from being reported and rapists get to go free cause they went after a chick that likes sex."

yep, that sux. but the fact that people will be assholes should not deny a non-asshole from getting a fair trial and being able to defend himself.

Quote :

"I mean I could definitely see where if a chick is raped and there is definite evidence of a forced entry, she is all bloody with defense wounds and found naked by the dumpsters..."

all of that has to be proven first, though. And, like it or not, the courtroom is where that is ultimately done. The same courtroom where the accused gets to defend himself. It sucks, but that is how it is.

12/27/2009 7:37:04 PM

omg. you can be raped when you are sober. in addition, isn't the court attempting to determine if the sex was consensual? if we already know the sex is consensual then the court has already decided the case.

rape shield laws, like all laws, aren't full-proof. there are always cracks. however, i think that the point is that the courts have decided that NOT having these laws in place does considerable more harm than good by discrediting women based on their sexual history.

bringing up any sexual history discredits a woman's claim of rape. if you are trying to prove a rape occurred and you bring up sexual history, you may cause the woman's allegations to be discredited or have the jury believe that because of promiscuity the woman was somehow more deserving of rape.

[Edited on December 27, 2009 at 7:41 PM. Reason : .]

12/27/2009 7:39:18 PM

Moral of the story is, if you're a chick that likes to have a lot of sex with a lot of different guys but you don't want the whole world to know about it, you better pray you never get raped, cause everyone is going to know you like bumping uglies with random guys if you press charges.

12/27/2009 7:40:02 PM

i don't get how bringing up a woman's sexual history is a defense to rape

12/27/2009 7:42:13 PM

Quote :

"omg. you can be raped when you are sober"

I know. but look at my example. You are refusing to accept the whole idea of the example. In the example, A RAPE DID NOT OCCUR.

Quote :

"rape shield laws, like all laws, aren't full-proof. there are always cracks."

Yes, but we shouldn't be in the business of making laws that will obviously hurt the innocent and prevent them from defending themselves.

Quote :

"however, i think that the point is that the courts have decided that NOT having these laws in place does considerable more harm than good by discrediting women based on their sexual history. "

I would much rather hurt someone's feelings in court than put an innocent man behind bars because he was unable to defend himself due to a misguided law.

^ that's because you aren't listening. Look at what I posted again. Tell me in that one example that the sexual history is not relevant.

12/27/2009 7:42:17 PM

btw

not real

http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2009/09/artlurker_explains_rape_tunnel.php

12/27/2009 7:42:53 PM

Shelly Luse Va'Gine

vs.

Thomas D'Rapier

12/27/2009 7:43:32 PM

it isn't about hurting someone's feelings. it is about not discrediting the victim.

do you not get it? obviously not.

and

Quote :

"A RAPE DID NOT OCCUR."

DUH BUT IF A RAPE DIDN'T OCCUR THEN THE COURTS MUST HAVE ALREADY DECIDED THE SEX WAS CONSENSUAL SO WHY DO WE EVEN NEED THE VICTIM'S SEXUAL HISTORY?

^^ nope, sorry. you are the one that isn't listening.

how does introducing her history in that example show that the sex was consensual? because she had sex a lot before she must have wanted it this time?

[Edited on December 27, 2009 at 7:45 PM. Reason : .]

12/27/2009 7:44:07 PM