For fuck's sake.
There is a difference between wanting to meet someone you are attracted to and have sex with them, and wanting just any random man to force you to have sex whether you want to or not.
Discussion: That sex without consent is always rape
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
For fuck's sake.
There is a difference between wanting to meet someone you are attracted to and have sex with them, and wanting just any random man to force you to have sex whether you want to or not.
I thought we were talking about someone who's stoned or drunk?
In that kind of state your not capable of meeting anyone. In my experience such women are usually dressed like sluts anyway and inviting any passer by to partake of their wares.
Under those circumstances it wouldn't technically be rape, but it begs the question just what would you have to do to a women like that for it to be considered rape?
My guess is, they're practically rape-proof, as they would ultimately submit to anyone.
Would they really? Do you honestly think that? That's YOUR judgement of them, not how they actually are. Go up to one of those women and ask her if she would agree to sex with any random male. If not - she is not rape-proof.
I have no intention of carrying out a market research campaign amongst drunken tarts. Maybe if any of them could mentally focus long enough to comprehend a question they might just manage a reply, but how reliable would such a response be anyway under the circumstances?
No judge in his right mind should convict a man who has sex with a woman like that of rape.
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
It is not whom you do something to, but rather what you do to someone that makes it rape. (including ignoring certain things like the wishes of that person)
What I put in bold above is really rather creepy.
I've been reading this topic and have become quite interested in it, so thought i'd try and put my 2 cents in there, i'm not the best person with debates, so if I say something wrong or anything, apologies 
Hope no one minds me popping in.
Dressing provocatively doesnt really do them any favours... but they're not exactly asking to be raped. I wouldnt say just because you're pissed or stoned you're rape proof. I'd say it was down to self respect more... I mean surely despite someone being really drunk, they'd still be able to fathom the request as it's a pretty big deal to the majority. However if you have low self respect, sex is about as important as watching tv...
I think I may have gotten the wrong end of the stick and made absolutely no sense or decent contribution to this conversation. Sorry again.
Hope no one minds me popping in.Dressing provocatively doesnt really do them any favours... but they're not exactly asking to be raped. I wouldnt say just because you're pissed or stoned you're rape proof. I'd say it was down to self respect more... I mean surely despite someone being really drunk, they'd still be able to fathom the request as it's a pretty big deal to the majority. However if you have low self respect, sex is about as important as watching tv...
I think I may have gotten the wrong end of the stick and made absolutely no sense or decent contribution to this conversation. Sorry again.
Syzygys:
Nobody else was brave enough to take my challenge, you mean.
Really, I'm glad you did. It's a good debate so far, I think.
Well, the agreed word limit on posts was 1500 words, but I'm happy for you to post up to 4500 words in a post if you like, to even things up.
By the way, just to be clear: nothing you wrote was deleted in the Debate thread. I simply merged 7 of your posts into one.
TeKore:
What you have to say is as valid as what anybody else has to say. You're very welcome to join in.
Nobody else was brave enough to take my challenge, you mean.
Really, I'm glad you did. It's a good debate so far, I think.
Well, the agreed word limit on posts was 1500 words, but I'm happy for you to post up to 4500 words in a post if you like, to even things up.
By the way, just to be clear: nothing you wrote was deleted in the Debate thread. I simply merged 7 of your posts into one.
TeKore:
I've been reading this topic and have become quite interested in it, so thought i'd try and put my 2 cents in there, i'm not the best person with debates, so if I say something wrong or anything, apologies
What you have to say is as valid as what anybody else has to say. You're very welcome to join in.
I would like to make a short apology.
i missread the case study 2 as the note saying
"take ME if you want"
I apologise for the missunderstanding
i also took the wifes comment in case study 1 to mean that the wives were awear of the switch and just pretending they wernt
From a rereading of the initial post by my oponant and through reading the arguments by my colleges i realised i was mestaken in my assumption on both counts and apologise
i missread the case study 2 as the note saying
"take ME if you want"
I apologise for the missunderstanding
i also took the wifes comment in case study 1 to mean that the wives were awear of the switch and just pretending they wernt
From a rereading of the initial post by my oponant and through reading the arguments by my colleges i realised i was mestaken in my assumption on both counts and apologise
Bells
Staff member
Ok, I posted my round 2 post.
Damn food poisoning.:bawl: My husband and I have both been hugging the toilet since 4pm yesterday. He's still queasy while I was able to keep down some water and toast from this morning. Our 4 year old nephew had to be admitted to hospital this morning for severe dehydration. His mother is just as bad and his brother and our son's escaped because they did not eat the gravy their grandmother prepared. Tasted ok.. we thought the 'tang' came from the lime she always adds to food. Seems not.. Crazy woman (mother in law) made gravy and added in a gravy mix (to spice it up a little apparently) that she found in her cupboard. She failed to check the expiry date and it was only after we all fell ill and called them to see if they were sick, did she then check and realise it was past it's used by date by more than a year. A year!!
Ugh.. kids are still napping.. going to lie down.. queasiness is returning.:bawl:
Damn food poisoning.:bawl: My husband and I have both been hugging the toilet since 4pm yesterday. He's still queasy while I was able to keep down some water and toast from this morning. Our 4 year old nephew had to be admitted to hospital this morning for severe dehydration. His mother is just as bad and his brother and our son's escaped because they did not eat the gravy their grandmother prepared. Tasted ok.. we thought the 'tang' came from the lime she always adds to food. Seems not.. Crazy woman (mother in law) made gravy and added in a gravy mix (to spice it up a little apparently) that she found in her cupboard. She failed to check the expiry date and it was only after we all fell ill and called them to see if they were sick, did she then check and realise it was past it's used by date by more than a year. A year!!
Ugh.. kids are still napping.. going to lie down.. queasiness is returning.:bawl:
Hey Bells. I'm sorry to hear about your condition. If you have "true" food poisoning, which from the symptoms you have described and the duration, it sounds like you do, I really feel for you. I have had it as well, not once, but twice, and it was the most godawful experience I could imagine. *Somebody shoot me* I discussed it with a woman experienced with both the birth of children and food poisoning and she said she would pick labor any day. Of course, I realize this varies greatly from individual to individual. Anyway, hope you are better soon.
It is interesting to follow the progress of this debate. One side seems to be presenting their case, let's just say, "a little better" than the other.
As an item of curiousity, where, in the context of the debate topic, does necrophilia fit in legally?
Disclaimer:
1. I am not advocating necrophilia. 2. I am not condoning necrophilia. 3. I think necrophilia is sick.
Any questions, see these three points.
Thank you Asguard. I will do that. I was ready to be attacked for even asking, so thanks again...
I read through it.
From your Wiki reference:
I'm confused. WTF is "consensual necrophilia "????
ok lets use the anology of donating your body to science.
In order to give your body to medical students (or forensic science students or whatever) you write a will and living will making this clear. Now its concevable that the same regulations could be aplied to necrophilia where you chose to leave your body to an organisation or person through a will for the purposes of necrophilla. Thats what they are refering to
In order to give your body to medical students (or forensic science students or whatever) you write a will and living will making this clear. Now its concevable that the same regulations could be aplied to necrophilia where you chose to leave your body to an organisation or person through a will for the purposes of necrophilla. Thats what they are refering to
OK. And, the $64 question, what happens if they do? Say they make a living will addressing this when they are 20 years old. They die at 80. Is "consent" presumed to remain in place unless explicitly revoked? Please think about this carefully before you answer.
I realize that this is an absolutely absurd case to contemplate, but Wiki seems to have thought of it. Not that that is worth a hill of beans of course...
dont blame me he asked the question
Oh, f**k. Did I just screw up again? Violate some sort of rule? I didn't mean to inhibit the debate...
Bells,
Food poisoning is awful. I went to a restaurant about a year ago and spent most of the night throwing up after eating a particular dish with a lot of cheese (presumably dodgy). Thankfully, my partner had something different, and she was just fine.
Food poisoning is awful. I went to a restaurant about a year ago and spent most of the night throwing up after eating a particular dish with a lot of cheese (presumably dodgy). Thankfully, my partner had something different, and she was just fine.