Rape Humor

[Imran Siddiqui]

There is a hell of a lot of difference between the No, kiss, no, kiss, yes scenario and the rape scenario which is NO, NO, NO.

The first scenario may not be as bad, but is still reprehensible conduct.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

Isolated cases are not the rule, they are exceptions. They can make you think, but they can't be used to backup arguments.

This is completely false taken generally.

The fact that I personally know of two cases where this has happened leads me to think that it is more common than one might think. Actually I know of three, but the third is a more difficult case (i.e. I have good, but not conclusive reasons to believe that a rape never took place). I suppose you don't find it problematic that the current political climate means that people can be accused and suffer social and legal penalties without having sufficient evidence presented against them. This means that there is an incentive for people to make false accusations.

The problem here is that some radical feminists believe that rape is a comparative wrong - so that it is reasonable to lock up innocent people because innocent women are raped (I've known people who believe this). This makes a mockery of the justice system in every civilised country. It's like saying we should tolerate the executions of innocent people because innocent people are murdered, but murder is not a comparative wrong, it is not compensated for by the murder of others. Neither is rape.

Look, no amount of rhetoric is going to change the scientifically established fact that women sometimes say "no" when they really mean "yes". Them's just the facts - accept them. People play games with language, what's new.

This doesn't mean that there aren't different ways that a person might say "no", and the cases which involve rape are usually ones where it should be obvious to any reasonable person that consent has not been given.

All it shows in my opinion is that "No means no." is a dumb slogan and would be better replaced with something else.

The background to this is that while I agree with radical feminists about most things, I think they behave like fundamentalists when it comes to rape and sexual harassment. Their arguments are simply bad arguments that rely on bad generalisations such as "all rape is about power" (Sorry, many are, but some aren't in any useful sense anyway) or that sexual harassment is a form of discrimination (sometimes it is, often it isn't).

[juhani_kahvi]

-

[Imran Siddiqui]

Look, no amount of rhetoric is going to change the scientifically established fact that women sometimes say "no" when they really mean "yes".

I'm still waiting for that cite.

When a woman says no, you STOP. You do not keep going!

Maybe in hindsight the woman may say, they really meant yes (though I doubt it), but when they say no then, they mean no.

In short, no means no. To propagate a no means yes standard sometimes is incredibly sexist.

[juhani_kahvi]

In short, no means no. To propagate a no means yes standard sometimes is incredibly sexist.

Look, the two sexes are different. Also the sentences "women do not have penises" or "in the history of the world women have rarely been great leaders" may sound sexist to someone, but they are simply true.
It is true that there are women who DO mean yes sometimes when they say no. You can say that thinking like this sounds sexist, but it does not make the observation false.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Look, no amount of rhetoric is going to change the scientifically established fact that women sometimes say "no" when they really mean "yes".

I'm still waiting for that cite.

When a woman says no, you STOP. You do not keep going!

Maybe in hindsight the woman may say, they really meant yes (though I doubt it), but when they say no then, they mean no.

In short, no means no. To propagate a no means yes standard sometimes is incredibly sexist.

OK Guys. As a compromise, when a woman says "no" you could stop and talk some more. If she then says "yes" you're covered.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by juhani_kahvi


Look, the two sexes are different. Also the sentences "women do not have penises" or "in the history of the world women have rarely been great leaders" may sound sexist to someone, but they are simply true.
It is true that there are women who DO mean yes sometimes when they say no. You can say that thinking like this sounds sexist, but it does not make the observation false.

Yes!

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia


There have been many cases of sexual abuse by older and larger females of younger and weaker males, eg in childcare and babysitting situations.

The tyke doesn't have intercourse with her though, and I suspect that when she grabs his little penis and tries to stuff it inside of her it will go limp pretty quick.

A man's erection is a physical response - it doesn't mean that he's mentally willing to have sex. Rape is as much a state of mental resistance as it is physical.

I truly believe that there are probably very few men around who could get an erection while being threatened with bodily harm. The physiologic responses of fear are generally contradictory to those of sexual arousal.

Although I have to admit there's something kinda likeable about a guy leaning, splay legged, with his hands on the wall, over a toilet trying to coax his stream from an insistently uncooperative member

Are you a marquesa?

[juhani_kahvi]

The tyke doesn't have intercourse with her though, and I suspect that when she grabs his little penis and tries to stuff it inside of her it will go limp pretty quick.

Men can be raped, although it is unusual and it indeed requires additional work to force and erection on a scared and unwilling male. I would also like to point out that men can be forced to give oral sex, and I wouldn't say it is essentially less horrible than actual intercourse.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by juhani_kahvi
By the way, if you plan to complain to me about it, I suggest that you don't view it in the first place.

Or just tell a mod that he's linking to pornographic and hateful images.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
I truly believe that there are probably very few men around who could get an erection while being threatened with bodily harm. The physiologic responses of fear are generally contradictory to those of sexual arousal.

I get an erection just by looking at a ball go into a golf hole... I'm sure with a constant friction you could get a man to get erection.

EDIT: On a more serious note, copntradictory? not really. What about raised heartbeat, increase in hormone activity etc etc?

Although I have to admit there's something kinda likeable about a guy leaning, splay legged, with his hands on the wall, over a toilet trying to coax his stream from an insistently uncooperative member

I wouldnt mind being handcuffed and being totally dominated by a hot woman..

[Az]

better take the link off, DL.

[Gibsie]

It's quite weird: in the movie "40 Days and 40 Nights" the male character is quite clearly raped while he is asleep, yet throughout the rest of the film any blame for the sex that happened at that point is inherently placed upon himself. Never does anyone consider the woman who found him tied up and asleep to have done anything more than sneaky; I find this quite appalling.

I find statements like, "In other words the idea of someone being innocent until proven guilty and the requirement for a decent amount of evidence have gone out the window when it comes to rape" quite baffling really; perhaps the legal systems of the US are the total opposite of the UK, but considering less than 10% of rape accusations actually lead to someone being charged in Britain, and then less than 10% of those cases lead to a conviction, I think it's safe to say this is one instance in which "innocent until proven guilty" if firmly entrenched in the law.

[RGBVideo]

better take the link off, DL.

How nice to see open-minded people here!
Immediately when somebody which you haven't seen before appears, he's a DL! Great work, guys!

Actually, that guy has been registered since the "evil, evil Finland" -thread.
He's an active poster on many other forums. He even has his own webpages where he
talks lot about himself.
All this is in the front of your noses. Yet you still yell "DL!DL!".

Great work, guys!

(Yep, I agree that the link had some parts not proper for this site...
Propably some crude censoring should've been done...)

I know tath tehre are spelink misstakes, its 11:30 PM heer, gais!

[Az]

quote:
Although I have to admit there's something kinda likeable about a guy leaning, splay legged, with his hands on the wall, over a toilet trying to coax his stream from an insistently uncooperative member

I wouldnt mind being handcuffed and being totally dominated by a hot woman..

those two quotes sound so wrong together. why? one word:
watersports.

Gibsie: The name doesn't ring a bell. could you tell some more of the script?