Anti Rape Underwear - Page 14

On November 08 2013 03:57 Severedevil wrote:

By this logic, asking any person to do anything constitutes coercion, because any request carries with it the implication that you want them to do that thing, and therefore if they do not do that thing, you will be less happy.

On November 08 2013 03:57 Severedevil wrote:

By this logic, asking any person to do anything constitutes coercion, because any request carries with it the implication that you want them to do that thing, and therefore if they do not do that thing, you will be less happy.

On November 08 2013 04:07 Grumbels wrote:

It's like my brother who when he was 15 said that forced attendance of family dinners were an infringement on his human rights and that the inability to choose your family was a cosmic injustice.

On November 08 2013 03:54 Thieving Magpie wrote:


Are you saying words can't be threatening?
Are you saying that making you unhappy can't be threatening?

On November 08 2013 04:16 gedatsu wrote:

I tell my girlfriend that I want to have sex.
She says no.
I say that if she won't have sex with me, I'll break up with her.
She says ok.
We have sex.

Rape?

On November 08 2013 03:44 farvacola wrote:
The dude called a woman who gives in to the sexual demands of her partner a "pathetic subhuman pet", I wouldn't expect much to move him.

On November 08 2013 04:10 Thieving Magpie wrote:


It depends on the relationship and the power dynamic.

A boss asking you to have sex with them is different from a stranger in a bar and is different from a hooker in a street corner.

But being that domestic violence is one of the leading causes of injury to women, significant others and spouses are a lot more threatened by it statistically. And women know that.

On November 08 2013 04:20 Kojak21 wrote:


nope cause she has the option to not do it and break up with you

On November 08 2013 03:44 farvacola wrote:
The dude called a woman who gives in to the sexual demands of her partner a "pathetic subhuman pet", I wouldn't expect much to move him.

On November 08 2013 04:10 Thieving Magpie wrote:


It depends on the relationship and the power dynamic.

A boss asking you to have sex with them is different from a stranger in a bar and is different from a hooker in a street corner.

But being that domestic violence is one of the leading causes of injury to women, significant others and spouses are a lot more threatened by it statistically. And women know that.

On November 08 2013 04:23 Severedevil wrote:

Far to the contrary! I'm saying it is a human's choice to agree or reject propositions; it is a woman's choice whether she agrees to sex requested by her partner, or rejects it. Women, as adult human beings, are capable of making this decision for themselves. If you refuse her the right to make her own choices, you are treating her as a pathetic subhuman pet.

I oppose such condescending treatment of women.


If your significant other is a scary violent person who might hurt you if you refuse to abide by their requests, that is the problem.

On November 08 2013 04:26 oBlade wrote:

He wasn't doing that, he was suggesting that was Thieving Magpie's view of women due to Thieving Magpie apparently not respecting that women are rational people and can make their own decisions.


You have yet to connect the dots between the fact that domestic violence exists (which is an uncontroversial point) - and takes victims of any gender - and your conclusion that "Getting your girlfriend to have sex even if she's not in the mood" is categorically rape.

On November 08 2013 03:51 Thieving Magpie wrote:


Getting people to do what they don't want to is coercion, by definition.

On November 08 2013 04:28 DonKey_ wrote:

This feels like a lot of word play. 90%(BS made up number)of men or women are not going to consider "Getting your girlfriend to have sex even if she's not in the mood etc..." as rape. That kind of interpretation of rape is dangerous and is part of what creates the victim blaming, when individuals view a victim as claiming something along the lines of what you said, rather than the commonly accepted version of rape.

On November 08 2013 04:27 Thieving Magpie wrote:


If she does not want to have sex with you, but you make her have sex with you anyway, it doesn't stop being rape just because you don't punch her.

On November 08 2013 04:28 DonKey_ wrote:

This feels like a lot of word play. 90%(BS made up number)of men or women are not going to consider "Getting your girlfriend to have sex even if she's not in the mood etc..." as rape. That kind of interpretation of rape is dangerous and is part of what creates the victim blaming, when individuals view a victim as claiming something along the lines of what you said, rather than the commonly accepted version of rape.

On November 08 2013 04:32 NovaTheFeared wrote:


If by force or threat of force, that's one thing. But you make it sound as if a boyfriend who persuades his girlfriend to have sex despite her initial reluctance, in the absence of force or threat, is also rape. Is that your position?

On November 08 2013 04:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:


The idea that someone who doesn't want to have sex is merely "initial reluctance" is my problem.

On November 08 2013 04:36 NovaTheFeared wrote:


That's interesting, then. You don't believe a person can be persuaded to have sex, because that makes it rape.

On November 08 2013 02:12 gedatsu wrote:

Disregarding rape in prison settings, very few people do that. Usually they are the rapist, an accessory to the rape, or a close relative or friend to the rapist. These are, on the large scale of things, only a handful of people. By far the majority of people strongly condemn rape. Convicted rapists often require special protection in prison, because the other inmates will consider them the scum of the earth.

Or perhaps you are talking about jokes made about people you've never met and never will meet. I myself have told jokes about the Fritzl case, for example, because there's a clever pun about it that can be made in Swedish. "Har du släckt i källaren" means "did you turn off the lights in the basement", while "har du släkt i källaren" means "do you have family (members) in the basement". That doesn't mean I don't think it was a horrible crime. It's no different than making jokes about Hitler or slavery or Mao.

Anyway. The point is that you can joke about anything, without supporting the crime or disaster behind it. Very few people would laugh in the face of the victim.