Rape Humor

[Agathon]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


There's no problem with "no means no," except for people who don't want to be constrained in their quest for sex and power. It's not a hard or inconvenient rule of thumb. Why do men so vigorously resist simple decency, cuz it's not women who protest the rule? I always told people that if they said no, I'd take them at their word, and go no further. Maybe I didn't get as much sex as I could have, but at least I'm not a rapist.

I agree that this is a prudent strategy, but one that not everyone adheres to (and this doesn't make them rapists since people like to play games).

There is a problem though. Read the paper I linked to. I don't necessarily agree with everything they say in it, but they are pretty clear on the rape stuff.

I am claiming two things in agreement with the authors of the article:

(1) Consent on its own as a basis for rape convictions creates problems (it tends to require that the defendant prove consent rather than the state disproving it).

(2) Simply taking saying "no" on it's own and ignoring the context of the utterance, since people often say "no" when they don't mean it, is not a sufficient proof of wrongdoing (there is a prima facie case for reasonable doubt). I urge you to look at the Berkowitz case on p.2 of the linked article. Can you say if this guy is innocent or guilty? I can't - that's why I think he should have been acquitted even if he did do it, because there was reasonable doubt.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Agathon
(1) Consent on its own as a basis for rape convictions creates problems (it tends to require that the defendant prove consent rather than the state disproving it).

No it doesn't. Rape is still the hardest crime to prove, and most of those tried for rape still get acquitted.

The fact that people may be convicted of rape on insufficient evidence or are wrongly accused of rape, etc. is not sufficient reason to do away with the informed consent rule. There are quite a few people who are wrongly imprisoned for murder, theft, and other crimes. The system is currently broken and needs repair, but the problem isn't in the definition of the crimes.

[Agathon]

You've misunderstood my argument.

Did I say I was doing away with it?

No.

In my view it is necessary but not sufficient for a conviction.

I said...

Consent on its own as a basis...

Yes the system is broken - that's my point.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Good point re the point, but I suspect the mods would likewise edit out some of the results of violence which can be found on somethingrotten. At least I hope they would.

Anyways, here's some links for you Doc:

http://www.survivingtothriving.org/malesurvivors

http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:2N4NSkgYbicC:https://www.vix.com/men/rape/how2rap...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

http://www.eightballmagazine.com/diatribes/volume01/diatribes030/diatribes605-625/diatribes621.htm

I don't know how good that last one is.

In the first link they mention the abuse of males chiefly referring to the abuse of boys. No one refutes that boys are sometimes molested by men, but that's not what we're talking about. Women may sometimes molest young adolescent boys too by taking advantage of their naivete. That's a form of rape I suppose, but seducing someone who is unable to give true consent because of his age buit is duped into performing the act is not the same as trying to force someone into performing via the threat of violence.

In the second link the author mentions various means of producing an erection via artificial means. I suppose the rubber band method might work sometimes, but remember that in addition to constricting the outflow of blood via the vein it's also necessary to increase the inflow by dilating the artery. Similar devices are used medically rarely since they don't work all that well. Generally the constricting band has a gap in the center of the side that wraps around the underside of the penis since you want to allow semen to flow out of the urethra. A simple rubber band would constrict the urethra and block the flow of semen. Medical devices usually also include a suction device to increase blood flow into the penis. Remember the first Austin Powers movie? The part about using popsicle sticks makes this article rather questionable, since the female raper would have to stick the sticks inside of herself along with the propped up penis.

In the third article the female rapers conclude that the man wasn't much of a lover. Perhaps it's just not that easy to rape a man in that way.

[Urban Ranger]

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.

All right, if you want to compare it this way, we must also include victims of pedophiles and such. Also, bear in mind that not all sexual abuses are rapes.

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia
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.

It's just that fear makes erection rather unlikely.

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia
From the number of times I've seen a guy try to urinate with an erection, this is evidently not the case.

Hm. Does this mean he gets an erection from urinating, or does this mean he tries to urinate while having an erection?

And how did you make these observations?

[Imran Siddiqui]

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.

Sounds good to me... as long as you stop EXACTLY when she says no.

Haven't you ever made out with a woman who was more than willing to go only so far?

No... I'm not a rapist.

There's no problem with "no means no," except for people who don't want to be constrained in their quest for sex and power. It's not a hard or inconvenient rule of thumb. Why do men so vigorously resist simple decency, cuz it's not women who protest the rule? I always told people that if they said no, I'd take them at their word, and go no further. Maybe I didn't get as much sex as I could have, but at least I'm not a rapist.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Agathon
This is completely false taken generally.

Perhaps you have never heard of the fallacy called Hasty Generalization? In layman's terms, that means you can't fix a straight line with just one point.

[Apocalypse]

I'd never directly make the first move. The closest I'd probably come is to use Joey's European story from Friends on someone who I know has seen that episode.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Haven't you ever made out with a woman who was
more than willing to go only so far?

No... I'm not a rapist.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove Quite a bit

No problem Doc. Those are the links I found in a 15 minute search. I didn't find the police report of the 2 women who used a knife to sexually assault a guy here where I live about 15 years ago. That one made the papers. Something tells me that 99% of such incidents would never be reported anywhere.

If you want to deny that substances and weapons can never be used to coerse a man to perform sex acts with a woman or women against his will, well, whatever floats your boat.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by notyoueither
If you want to deny that substances and weapons can never be used to coerse a man to perform sex acts with a woman or women against his will, well, whatever floats your boat.

I do not exclude this possibility. However, it remains a fact that most of the victims of rapes are women (or female, if you include children).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

No, but apparently you do.

Any acts that go beyond the point of time the woman says 'no', is sexual assault.

[Dis]

I got an erection the first time I got my car over 100 mph when I was a teenager. Is that normal?

Just another example at how a man can get an erection even though he doesn't want sex.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

No, but apparently you do.

Any acts that go beyond the point of time the woman says 'no', is sexual assault.

Then why are you being an ass and suggesting that I am saying what I have not said?

I never said that anyone should go if the response is no.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'll quote you:

In other words, she said no, she said no, she said yes.

How do you make her say yes? By continuing to make out with her? If not, I'd like to understand.