|
United States41980 Posts
On August 23 2012 23:31 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:31 KwarK wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. I think what he was trying to say was that when they say "no" he stops, briefly pleads for sex and if they don't change their mind he leaves. I don't think he meant that he was thrusting during the "come on, please?" phase. When a guy tries to pull that off with me, it is pretty annoying. Besides, having sex with someone who said no the first time and then yes the second or third is playing with fire if you ask me (though it seems rather unlikely for the situation to simply go that way) and adding pressure when someone refuses is also no good.
Yeah, I guess the degree to which it adds pressure is an important factor. If the situation is in no way coercive then I see absolutely no moral problem with it (it may be annoying but that doesn't make it wrong). However obviously in situations where there is implied coercion for whatever reason (physical intimidation/strange environment/strange partner) then I understand that the woman may cave to pressure based upon the intimidation rather than the arguments in favour of sex that the man is making.
|
On August 23 2012 23:33 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. You're kind of missing the second part where he says that you drop it after the second no...
...because it's irrelevant.
Are we actually having this conversation?
How many no's do you fucking need?
|
United States41980 Posts
On August 23 2012 23:42 SunsetSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:33 Zambrah wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. You're kind of missing the second part where he says that you drop it after the second no... ...because it's irrelevant. Are we actually having this conversation? How many no's do you fucking need?
According to the golden rule that you objected to, just one to completely stop the sex.
The second no was for giving up on possible sex for the night and going on home.
|
I think he was talking about him asking his girlfriend if she felt like having sex. She replied no and then he would look in her eyes and plead: "p-please, I've been a good boy. I'll do the dishes more often!" in hopes of seducing her. If she then insisted on her refusal he would stop asking her.
I mean, I don't really see a problem with it. In many cases you have to ask someone a second time to convince them. If there is no coercion it's okay, like KwarK said.
|
On August 23 2012 23:43 KwarK wrote:
According to the golden rule that you objected to, just one to completely stop the sex.
The second no was for giving up on possible sex for the night and going on home.
Well, it's just the different interpretation's of that guy's post, isn't it?
No means no and all that.
Pleading and begging and pressuring gets into grey areas that are best avoided.
|
On August 23 2012 23:43 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:42 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:33 Zambrah wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. You're kind of missing the second part where he says that you drop it after the second no... ...because it's irrelevant. Are we actually having this conversation? How many no's do you fucking need? According to the golden rule that you objected to, just one to completely stop the sex. The second no was for giving up on possible sex for the night and going on home.
Hello Kwark. I'm thankful that an moderator is here and the direction of the discussion is kept civil.
However I think based on your last few replies to SunsetSC2, you might also be suffering from the same "macho" mentality.
The issue is very simple. MO MEANS NO!. There is no cooldown period where you try to get a rebound period and try again just to make sure if she really means it or if she has changed her mind.
|
Last time we had one of these threads we had someone permabanned for being a rapist. Who's it gonna be this time!?
|
If i was out clubbing or something and i asked a girl and she said no, that would be the end of it. Literally, stop and walk away.
With my wife, she's a stubborn mule and i dont get what i want unless i throw a hissy and sulk to get my end away xD It always ends in her telling me to fuck off anyway..then the next day she'll come to me, so it works out.
Moral of the story - Dont fucking touch a woman unless she says yes and clearly wants it. Doesnt matter who it bloody is
|
On August 23 2012 23:44 Grumbels wrote:
I think he was talking about him asking his girlfriend if she felt like having sex. She replied no and then he would look in her eyes and plead: "p-please, I've been a good boy. I'll do the dishes more often!" in hopes of seducing her. If she then insisted on her refusal he would stop asking her.
I mean, I don't really see a problem with it. In many cases you have to ask someone a second time to convince them. If there is no coercion it's okay, like KwarK said.
If it's a girlfriend (presumably one you've had sex with before), it might be different based on your previous experience, like she might have said no before only to tease you or she changes her mind. The important thing to consider here is that she is your girlfriend and there is prior indication to her behavior. But the golden rule should always be NO MEANS NO.
|
If youre in a position where it really appears that sex (realistically, and consensually) is an option, there's really no fault for just making sure. How many times I've been told "I only said no to see if you cared enough to try again" is infuriating. With regards to sex, a date, love in general, you name it. You can't blame a guy for only asking when so many women reinforce the behavior and at times romanticizing it.
I mean clearly there's a line between that and pressuring. I think?
|
On August 23 2012 23:31 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. I think what he was trying to say was that when they say "no" he stops, briefly pleads for sex and if they don't change their mind he leaves. I don't think he meant that he was thrusting during the "come on, please?" phase.
Talk about a massive misquote... Let's take a single part of the sentence and destroy the entire meaning of it.
On August 23 2012 23:48 S:klogW wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:43 KwarK wrote:On August 23 2012 23:42 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:33 Zambrah wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. You're kind of missing the second part where he says that you drop it after the second no... ...because it's irrelevant. Are we actually having this conversation? How many no's do you fucking need? According to the golden rule that you objected to, just one to completely stop the sex. The second no was for giving up on possible sex for the night and going on home. Hello Kwark. I'm thankful that an moderator is here and the direction of the discussion is kept civil. However I think based on your last few replies to SunsetSC2, you might also be suffering from the same "macho" mentality. The issue is very simple. MO MEANS NO!. There is no cooldown period where you try to get a rebound period and try again just to make sure if she really means it or if she has changed her mind.
How the hell is it a "macho" mentality? It's not like he holds them down and screams "YOU WANT SEX" after they say no... I almost feel like you've never even had sex in your life. Oh and Mo Means No? I like that rule.
|
United States41980 Posts
On August 23 2012 23:48 S:klogW wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:43 KwarK wrote:On August 23 2012 23:42 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:33 Zambrah wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. You're kind of missing the second part where he says that you drop it after the second no... ...because it's irrelevant. Are we actually having this conversation? How many no's do you fucking need? According to the golden rule that you objected to, just one to completely stop the sex. The second no was for giving up on possible sex for the night and going on home. Hello Kwark. I'm thankful that an moderator is here and the direction of the discussion is kept civil. However I think based on your last few replies to SunsetSC2, you might also be suffering from the same "macho" mentality. The issue is very simple. MO MEANS NO!. There is no cooldown period where you try to get a rebound period and try again just to make sure if she really means it or if she has changed her mind.
There was no sex happening following the first no in that scenario. I have already conceded the problems inherent in asking if they're sure based upon potential coercive factors. However a non coercive "are you sure?" in an environment where the woman feels safe and trusts you to respect her wishes whatever the answer harms no-one. Sunset was right about the grey area best being avoided but the existence of grey doesn't mean situations can't be white.
|
On August 23 2012 23:51 Gene wrote:
If youre in a position where it really appears that sex (realistically, and consensually) is an option, there's really no fault for just making sure. How many times I've been told "I only said no to see if you cared enough to try again" is infuriating. With regards to sex, a date, love in general, you name it. You can't blame a guy for only asking when so many women reinforce the behavior and at times romanticizing it.
As long as it doesn't lapse into belligerence it seems fairly acceptable, obviously the necessity of confirmation could be avoided by appropriately interpreting body language, but thats just unrealistic.
I stress that this is NOT okay when it lapses into belligerent behavior, but if its just confirmation it should be mostly acceptable just as long as it doesn't persist past a certain threshold.
|
On August 23 2012 23:53 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:31 KwarK wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. I think what he was trying to say was that when they say "no" he stops, briefly pleads for sex and if they don't change their mind he leaves. I don't think he meant that he was thrusting during the "come on, please?" phase. Talk about a massive misquote... Let's take a single part of the sentence and destroy the entire meaning of it.
You weren't being clear.
One no is always enough.
The two women in this thread are telling you one no means no, and you're all actually arguing we're wrong.
It's actually incredible.
|
On August 23 2012 23:50 S:klogW wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:44 Grumbels wrote:
I think he was talking about him asking his girlfriend if she felt like having sex. She replied no and then he would look in her eyes and plead: "p-please, I've been a good boy. I'll do the dishes more often!" in hopes of seducing her. If she then insisted on her refusal he would stop asking her.
I mean, I don't really see a problem with it. In many cases you have to ask someone a second time to convince them. If there is no coercion it's okay, like KwarK said. If it's a girlfriend (presumably one you've had sex with before), it might be different based on your previous experience, like she might have said no before only to tease you or she changes her mind. The important thing to consider here is that she is your girlfriend and there is prior indication to her behavior. But the golden rule should always be NO MEANS NO.
Well, you're still jumping on that guy+Kwark and accusing them of stuff when it might just be they were talking about different scenarios then the one you're thinking of. If you ask your girlfriend if she feels like having sex and she says no you have a little bit of room to then tell her about why you think it's a good idea, in hopes of changing her mood. In that case the first no she says is "I'm not interested" and the second no is "you can't convince me". Which should be enough.
On August 23 2012 23:51 Gene wrote:
If youre in a position where it really appears that sex (realistically, and consensually) is an option, there's really no fault for just making sure. How many times I've been told "I only said no to see if you cared enough to try again" is infuriating. With regards to sex, a date, love in general, you name it. You can't blame a guy for only asking when so many women reinforce the behavior and at times romanticizing it.
I mean clearly there's a line between that and pressuring. I think?
I would highly advise against this. If a woman plays games with you and says no not meaning no then just walk away from having sex with her until she communicates better.
|
On August 23 2012 23:51 Gene wrote:
If youre in a position where it really appears that sex (realistically, and consensually) is an option, there's really no fault for just making sure. How many times I've been told "I only said no to see if you cared enough to try again" is infuriating. With regards to sex, a date, love in general, you name it. You can't blame a guy for only asking when so many women reinforce the behavior and at times romanticizing it.
This. Sex in the UK is not about love anymore, it's about 17 year olds wanting to do it. Part of the problem is the culture these days in the UK (and probably other countries, but I can't speak for them), losing your virginity and "banging many chicks" is the cool thing to do now. Part of this problem I believe is the way that women (a lot of them still in their teens) behave. If you've seen pictures or heard stories or read articles about UK social aspects (clubs and bars), you'd know that UK girls egg boys/men on. If a girl is practically grinding themselves against you, you go back to either of your houses etc, sex is a strong possibility. While it's wrong men assume they should get sex, it's not entirely their fault. If a girl behaves like the "normal girl" but doesn't want sex, how is the man to know?
|
On August 23 2012 23:55 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:48 S:klogW wrote:On August 23 2012 23:43 KwarK wrote:On August 23 2012 23:42 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:33 Zambrah wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. You're kind of missing the second part where he says that you drop it after the second no... ...because it's irrelevant. Are we actually having this conversation? How many no's do you fucking need? According to the golden rule that you objected to, just one to completely stop the sex. The second no was for giving up on possible sex for the night and going on home. Hello Kwark. I'm thankful that an moderator is here and the direction of the discussion is kept civil. However I think based on your last few replies to SunsetSC2, you might also be suffering from the same "macho" mentality. The issue is very simple. MO MEANS NO!. There is no cooldown period where you try to get a rebound period and try again just to make sure if she really means it or if she has changed her mind. There was no sex happening following the first no in that scenario. I have already conceded the problems inherent in asking if they're sure based upon potential coercive factors. However a non coercive "are you sure?" in an environment where the woman feels safe and trusts you to respect her wishes whatever the answer harms no-one. Sunset was right about the grey area best being avoided but the existence of grey doesn't mean situations can't be white.
I agree with you, however the existence of white is pretty rare and I dare say only exists in existing relationships.
|
United States41980 Posts
On August 23 2012 23:57 SunsetSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:53 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:31 KwarK wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. I think what he was trying to say was that when they say "no" he stops, briefly pleads for sex and if they don't change their mind he leaves. I don't think he meant that he was thrusting during the "come on, please?" phase. Talk about a massive misquote... Let's take a single part of the sentence and destroy the entire meaning of it. You weren't being clear. One no is always enough. The two women in this thread are telling you one no means no, and you're all actually arguing we're wrong. It's actually incredible.
I don't think anyone is arguing that sex should continue following the no. The degree to which asking again is coercive is currently the discussion.
|
On August 23 2012 23:17 SunsetSC2 wrote:
...Back to Starcraft.
In the General Forum, you willl find threads about Starcraft are pretty rare.
Everyone knows no means no, anybody saying otherwise is either an idiot trying to be funny which honestly is to be expected on the internet, get used it
or
Alternatively it's somebody trying to argue semantics by giving hypothetical situations, which is exactly what this thread calls for because the question is "What is rape?" followed by various definitions.
Try not to get angry at people exploring a subject in their own way and try not to feel like you have the right to come in here and lay down the law and speak down to everyone else just because you are a woman.
Most of what you said is true, but actually one of the posts I was most disappointed with in this thread was yours... somehow I expected more.
"No means no" isn't a suitable definition of rape which is why we are having this discussion in the first place, so entering into a complicated debate and saying NO MEANS NO OMFGWTFBBQ as if everyone here with any sort of idea or opinion that is more sophisticated than that is wrong............ is pointless and irritating.
To everyone who responded negatively to the following point:
Edit: From reading the thread, to address the specific point you seem to have entered upon all stems from the extremely poor analogy of the boar and the starving man, then touched upon slightly differently with the guy saying about how some things are stupid and the victim is partially to blame. This comment is directed at everbyody who responded negatively to these comments.
For example : If I go up to someone with a long criminal record of physical violence, anger problems and possibly even mental issues who has a reputation for being a crazy bastard who will beat your ass if you even look the wrong way at him, if I approach this man and start shouting and swearing in his face and calling him a fucking pussy and saying things about his family and then he kicks my ass, who is to blame?
Of course he is responsible for his own actions but it was also a fucking stupid thing for me to do. End of story. That's all anybody was saying and it's undeniable.
|
On August 23 2012 23:57 SunsetSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 23:53 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:31 KwarK wrote:On August 23 2012 23:27 SunsetSC2 wrote:On August 23 2012 23:20 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
...The golden rule imo is start, she says no you go "common"... No, see, if she says no ONCE, you stop. Seriously. WTF. I think what he was trying to say was that when they say "no" he stops, briefly pleads for sex and if they don't change their mind he leaves. I don't think he meant that he was thrusting during the "come on, please?" phase. Talk about a massive misquote... Let's take a single part of the sentence and destroy the entire meaning of it. You weren't being clear. One no is always enough. The two women in this thread are telling you one no means no, and you're all actually arguing we're wrong. It's actually incredible.
Edited to remove a bit of rant
I was very simple, I said along the lines of no means no, but asking again with questions such as "not tonight?" or "are you sure" is completely acceptable. This "no means no" bullshit seems to only apply for men which I deem hypocritical and I see no issue with prying a few questions after. Apparently I must be doing something right because I've had my fair share of relationships including the one I'm in, but you and the other women are "experts" so please to misquote me more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
