EPTWhat is Rape? - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
NeMeSiS3
Canada2972 Posts
| ||
|
Shiragaku
Hong Kong4308 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:13 NeMeSiS3 wrote: I think one shouldn't argue that rarity equates to allowance... Obviously that is wrong and should quickly be corrected. I agree that female to male rape should be illegal. And I do not know too much about the justice system in the UK, but it seems like a very tedious to create laws in any healthy democracy. And there has not been any public outcry for this kind of law yet. But to get back on topic, what Sunset said about no being no and women are not trying to fuck with your head is not at all a controversial statement. I honestly do not know how many guys (including gay guys) get this idea. | ||
|
Reason
United Kingdom2770 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:07 SunsetSC2 wrote: Wow, really? Someone asked for a woman's opinion and I gave it. Sorry, I guess we shouldn't speak to African-Americans about civil rights either? You are all men - any wrong decision any of you happen to make in this regard, women are the victims. I'm not angry, I'm...bewildered, to an extent, and frightened about behavior people feel is appropriate. I'm sorry to have disappointed you so much. My "back to Starcraft" comment was supposed to be flippant. If a woman says no and you continue, it is rape - that is not me on a high horse, that's how it is. I understand that the definitions by law was where this thread started, and I apologise. Hey there's nothing wrong with giving your opinion and I definitely appreciate your input here, maybe I took your flippant comment the wrong way because it's a serious topic and your posts were definitely, if not overly, serious. "you are all men - any wrong decision any of you happen to make in this regard, woman are the victims" You see, that's just not the case. You have an equal right to take part in this discussion based on your gender, not a priority. I think your tone and clearly what you've written there suggested otherwise and that's why I wrote what I did. Don't take it any other way and certainly feel free to say what you want, but you are not immune to criticism so don't take it too harshly if you receive it. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:14 NeMeSiS3 wrote: I think one shouldn't argue that rarity equates to allowance... Obviously that is wrong and should quickly be corrected. You da boss What about Strap ons? Seriously, that is penetrating ^^ Strap ons are sexual assault as I have to assume they constitute a device or "other objects" as outlined. That really is an issue. EDIT: "sexual intercourse or deviate sexual activity by forcible compulsion OR with someone who is incapable of consent because he is physically helpless, mentally defective, or mentally incapacitated OR who is < 14 years old" is the definition of rape in Arkansas, and it seems like a sensible enough definition, of course the age of consent varies, but the general definition of rape as it pertains to law seems like it SHOULD be cut and dry, with any further detail being left to the court system to determine guilt or innocence based on the aforementioned qualifications that determine consent. I dunno, maybe I'm just missing something, but it seems like the definition of rape would be fairly straightfoward in the legal sense, with some variations based on cultural differences. | ||
Kevan
Sweden2303 Posts
| ||
|
NeMeSiS3
Canada2972 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:15 Shiragaku wrote: I agree that female to male rape should be illegal. And I do not know too much about the justice system in the UK, but it seems like a very tedious to create laws in any healthy democracy. And there has not been any public outcry for this kind of law yet. Again... Majority tendencies and whether or not people are aware should not equate to allowance of unjust things... You won't find many people arguing that a law should be written for equality sake, especially from women who have been arguing for equality their entire lives so to speak. What is more tedious is to be the politician who never changed the law to be more equality based and then the incident occurs where a male is date raped but no law to protect him. The law is to protect the minority of events as much as the majority, if it was simply the majority than we wouldn't have this global war on terrorism (which actually is having a reverse effect but that's a whole other discussion I won't bring here) On August 24 2012 00:17 Kevan wrote: If a girl tells you that she wants you to rape her, should it even be called rape then? It might be forced and there may be threats of violence or even just actual violence. Like you kind of have her consent but don't have her consent but you have her consent to not have it. Can you try and clarify that... I think you just said rape is ok lol | ||
|
Crushinator
Netherlands2138 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:01 SunsetSC2 wrote: In other news, now it's your MOTHERFUCKING BIRTHDAY, MATE! <33333 No, I don't think people are saying that. I just think the issue ought to be completely dropped after the first no because saying no once is extremely difficult in vulnerable situations. Oh please. I know my girlfriend well enough that I know when I can continue pursuing sex after she's said no the first time. Sometimes I will do it fairly agressively, and sometimes without success. She at times practically rapes me. We are both very secure with this, I don't know why this is a problem according to you. | ||
|
Tao367
United Kingdom324 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:15 Shiragaku wrote: I agree that female to male rape should be illegal. And I do not know too much about the justice system in the UK, but it seems like a very tedious to create laws in any healthy democracy. And there has not been any public outcry for this kind of law yet. Again, it is illegal in the uk, but it's all about social and culultral values. It's the age old example of "if a woman gets raped and reports it, she's brave." Conversely, "if a man gets raped by a woman and reports it, he gets laughed at and ridiculed for being raped by a woman." It's gender expectations that's the issue here, not rape itself in my opinion. | ||
|
SunsetSC2
Australia148 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:18 Crushinator wrote: Oh please. I know my girlfriend well enough that I know when I can continue pursuing sex after she's said no the first time. Sometimes I will do it fairly agressively, and sometimes without success. She at times practically rapes me. We are both very secure with this, I don't know why this is a problem according to you. I'm not talking about people in relationships, for crying out loud. | ||
|
Reason
United Kingdom2770 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:18 Crushinator wrote: Oh please. I know my girlfriend well enough that I know when I can continue pursuing sex after she's said no the first time. Sometimes I will do it fairly agressively, and sometimes without success. She at times practically rapes me. We are both very secure with this, I don't know why this is a problem according to you. Well I think the last two words of her post "vulnerable situations" should indicate why using your girlfriend is a poor example in this context. No means no is too blanket a term to apply to any and all situations, but certainly in vulnerable situations persistence may be misconstrued as force or intimidate somebody into acting in a way they wouldn't otherwise have acted. Edit: SunsetSC2 ninja'd  | ||
|
Tao367
United Kingdom324 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:17 Kevan wrote: If a girl tells you that she wants you to rape her, should it even be called rape then? It might be forced and there may be threats of violence or even just actual violence. Like you kind of have her consent but don't have her consent but you have her consent to not have it. If a person tells you they want you to rape them, it's not rape. At that point, it's consensual rough sex. Nothing more. | ||
|
Crushinator
Netherlands2138 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:20 SunsetSC2 wrote: I'm not talking about people in relationships, for crying out loud. My apologies then, but even not in a relationship you can get a feel for a person, and know that this can be ok. | ||
|
Kevan
Sweden2303 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:20 Tao367 wrote: If a person tells you they want you to rape them, it's not rape. At that point, it's consensual rough sex. Nothing more. Exactly, she shouldn't have called it rape in the first place, I knew it. | ||
|
DoubleReed
United States4130 Posts
http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/radicalizing-consent-towards-implementing-an-affirmative-consent-model-in-new-yorks-rape-law/ Usually "consensual rape" fantasy things is referred to as "ravishment" to differentiate between the two. | ||
KwarK
United States43736 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:20 Tao367 wrote: If a person tells you they want you to rape them, it's not rape. At that point, it's consensual rough sex. Nothing more. This is something that should only be attempted in a relationship in which you know and trust the other partner and even then it should be prenegotiated to a ridiculous degree. As with all BDSM play, keep it safe, sane and consensual. Safewords should always be used to ensure that it is just fantasy play. There are some sex things which you just can't safely do with strangers or near strangers, it's unfortunate but that's the way it is. | ||
|
RageBot
Israel1530 Posts
On August 23 2012 23:03 Waterflow wrote: I find it funny the people discussing in this thread is like 99.9% men (including me). And most men decide what is and what is not. Maybe we should let the women in and have a say in this aswell. Just saying ^^ Maybe it doesn't matter who does the discussion, but only what is said in the discussion? If the points are objectively true, it doesn't matter who says them, if they are not true, it still doesn't matter who says them | ||
|
NeMeSiS3
Canada2972 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:20 SunsetSC2 wrote: I'm not talking about people in relationships, for crying out loud. Actually that wasn't very clear and it could be misquoted that you were. Frankly, speaking outside the limits of a relationship, I can't help but see no issue in a man who has been getting signs (they're rather simple) to press the subject. I can see that if a girl really means no, it should be obvious but a lot of the time they're drunk and giggling which gives men very mixed signals, especially if she has been hanging on your arm all night. Generally speaking, and I'll stick to this as I've never been commited for rape charges but have had my fair share of 1 night stands and everything in between that asking a second time with a question such as "are you sure" or "not tonight?" etc is completely acceptable and totally in the women being asked hands to shut down again, you can't argue "well she said no the first time, but he asked again and she said yes... That's rape! No that is consent and unless there was any physical trauma or threatening action I can't help but see no issue. Please go on to explain. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:11 Shiragaku wrote: Once it happens, the laws will change. And really, it is very rare to the point that the justice system might as well focus on other issues. Female rape is actually not exceedingly rare, and I don't know why the justice system would ignore an issue like that. It's not like the UK is this new nation dude, they can start tackling what you might consider a "detail". | ||
|
Tao367
United Kingdom324 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:23 KwarK wrote: This is something that should only be attempted in a relationship in which you know and trust the other partner and even then it should be prenegotiated to a ridiculous degree. As with all BDSM play, keep it safe, sane and consensual. There are some sex things which you just can't safely do with strangers or near strangers, it's unfortunate but that's the way it is. Yes, common sense should prevail, but if the situation mentioned ever happened, it's not rape. There is genuinely no reason for a girl to claim she was raped at this point. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On August 24 2012 00:21 Crushinator wrote: My apologies then, but even not in a relationship you can get a feel for a person, and know that this can be ok. And what do you suppose happens when you get it wrong? Here's an idea: if she says no, assume that it's not her own personal opposite day and that she actually means it. | ||
| ||
