Rape: What is it?

hawkeye10 wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
hawkeye10 wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
hawkeye10 wrote:
Seven pages and not a whiff of a counter argument tells be that there is no one brave enough to take this topic up. It was worth the try.

Your reading incomprehension is only exceeded by your lack of knowing right from wrong.

Brave? Get a grip wimpy. Anyone who speaks of women as you do has some serious problems and it probably results from some perverse sense of misguided machoism.

If I have said anything about women that can not be documented then shame on me. You can see the documentation after you show up to the debate and make a counter argument. You don't get to see my cards for free.

You have, once again, shown your incomprehension and false sense of maturity.

explain how you can determine what a person whom you know nothing about comprehends. I need to know what superhuman powers you possess so that I can judge the validity of your claim. Can you document your extraordinary powers of perception?

No mystery. It is quite simple actually. One just has to read your utterly ridiculous and, yes, stupid replies and posts to determine your level of incomprehension.

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

Seven pages and not a whiff of a counter argument tells be that there is no one brave enough to take this topic up. It was worth the try.

Crap.

You post your suff all over and people have argued with you and Agrote until almost nobody is dumb enough any longer to attempt to engage you in reasoned discussion.

You are not here for discussion, you are here to propagandize your misogynist and pro-rape views.

You do not respond to the majority of arguments presented agaionst you, except to insist you are right, and post dumb op-ed stuiff which usually doesn't even support what you are saying.

When pressed, you show your true, hate-filled, colours.

I have heard your views expressed by almost every rapist and child abuser I have ever come across, (a few have been genuinely contrite and have worked to change....I have great respect for these men) yet you persist in believing yourself some sort of martyred intellectual avant-garde. So do the the avowed and active paedophiles, in the main; they have whole websites to moan and wank together.

Most men don't seem to have a problem with knowing when there is consent.......rapists pretend they do. Some probably convince themselves that they did.

Oh...the trick is, if you are not sure you have informed consent, don't do it. This works in all sorts of areas...like borrowing stuff from friends, exchange of confidential information between agencies, doing expensive work on cars, making contracts, and having sex.

It's really quite simple....millions and millions of people are able to negotiate these things every day......even stupid people.

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

Mame wrote:
I just wonder why these same threads keep popping up... agrote & paedophilia and hackeye and rape. Haven't we already had these discussions many times over? I think you two need to find a new forum for your peculiar views.

Yeah.....sexual abuse support trolls can really mess a place up.

These two are beginning to make the gun nuts and the political trolls look good to me.

Maybe I have been working in the field for too long....I know this is an irrational response to the actual number of threads they have created...but I actually almost can't bear to come to A2k right now because seeing their names on threads, and seeing the threads by them appearing actually creates a really nasty sort of distress for me.

Too long treating the adult and kid victims of sexual abuse, as well as hearing the justifications by the paedophiles and rapists?

If you are lobbying for banishment of members who have views that you don't agree with then come out and say that. If you are not saying that then so why should anyone care what the boundary between you and subjects that you don't want to deal with feels like to you? Are we supposed to enable your desire to stick your head in the sand? That would make everyone else here dependent with your problem, wouldn't it??

0 Replies

http://images.4wheeloffroad.com/whoops/131_0601_whps_01_z_+jeep_rubicon+_stuck_mud.jpg

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

Most men don't seem to have a problem with knowing when there is consent.......rapists pretend they do. Some probably convince themselves that they did.
.

The defintion of consent is rapidly changing, and is not well understood even by the experts.

My documentation, from 2007:

Quote:

Sexual consent is an understudied and undertheorized concept despite its importance to feminist researchers and activists interested in sexual violence. Literature on consent, although sparse, has been produced from a variety of disciplines, including law, psychology, and sociology. This article is a critical review of current literature and current understandings of sexual consent. Different conceptualizations of consent are analysed including implicit and explicit definitions from legal theorists and sexual violence and consent researchers. Alternatives, including communicative sexuality, are discussed and feminist understandings of the social context of consent and the social forces that produce understandings of consent are examined. Directions for future research are suggested.

Key Words: coercion rape sexual assault sexuality

http://fap.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/17/1/93

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

dlowan wrote:
Most men don't seem to have a problem with knowing when there is consent.......rapists pretend they do. Some probably convince themselves that they did.
.

The defintion of consent is rapidly changing, and is not well understood even by the experts.

My documentation, from 2007:

Quote:
Sexual consent is an understudied and undertheorized concept despite its importance to feminist researchers and activists interested in sexual violence. Literature on consent, although sparse, has been produced from a variety of disciplines, including law, psychology, and sociology. This article is a critical review of current literature and current understandings of sexual consent. Different conceptualizations of consent are analysed including implicit and explicit definitions from legal theorists and sexual violence and consent researchers. Alternatives, including communicative sexuality, are discussed and feminist understandings of the social context of consent and the social forces that produce understandings of consent are examined. Directions for future research are suggested.

Key Words: coercion rape sexual assault sexuality

http://fap.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/17/1/93

In case you don't know how this works dlowan: you must now come up with a reputable source that says directly that consent is well understood by the experts. If you can not then I win, because the masses can not possibly understand a concept that the experts in the field do not understand. At that point you then admit that I was right and that you were wrong on this point.

0 Replies

Or we could just all ignore you for the fool that you are...

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

dlowan wrote:
Mame wrote:
I just wonder why these same threads keep popping up... agrote & paedophilia and hackeye and rape. Haven't we already had these discussions many times over? I think you two need to find a new forum for your peculiar views.

Yeah.....sexual abuse support trolls can really mess a place up.

These two are beginning to make the gun nuts and the political trolls look good to me.

Maybe I have been working in the field for too long....I know this is an irrational response to the actual number of threads they have created...but I actually almost can't bear to come to A2k right now because seeing their names on threads, and seeing the threads by them appearing actually creates a really nasty sort of distress for me.

Too long treating the adult and kid victims of sexual abuse, as well as hearing the justifications by the paedophiles and rapists?

If you are lobbying for banishment of members who have views that you don't agree with then come out and say that. If you are not saying that then so why should anyone care what the boundary between you and subjects that you don't want to deal with feels like to you? Are we supposed to enable your desire to stick your head in the sand? That would make everyone else here dependent with your problem, wouldn't it??

I am stating a repsonse to your consistent trolling.

I would personally like to see people like you banned for the hate you promulgate, but that isn't going to happen.

Discussing the effects of your posts upon me or others is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and I will do it whenever I feel like it, whether you like it or not.

I am also quite reasonably able to discuss why people pushing the agenda pushed by you and Agrote disgust me. You will simply have to deal with it.

As for putting my head in the sand, I deal daily with the results of those who think the way you do and act on that thinking and the terrible trauma they cause. I probably am one of the people, barring those reading you who have experienced sexual violence as children or adults, who has their head least in the sand.

You like to try and control how people argue with and respond to you, don't you?

You'll not be allowed to control people here, whatever you do in whatever domain you live in.

People here will respond to you as they wish.

0 Replies

Which is, of course, to treat you like the heinous piece of garbage you are.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Which is, of course, to treat you like the heinous piece of garbage you are.

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

Seven pages and not a whiff of a counter argument tells be that there is no one brave enough to take this topic up. It was worth the try.

How can there be a counter-argument when there hasn't been any argument? The most that I've seen from you in the way of an "argument" is this:

hawkeye10 wrote:

However, what I want is for boundary violations to stop, for what I consider to be abuse to not happen, and i think that we can do much better at this if we change how we approach the erotic. I am in favor of mostly soul based solutions, as thus I have little interest in the ego based solutions such as legalism and morality, which have been overly used in western society and no longer work, if they ever did.

But what does that mean? How should we change the way "we approach the erotic?" What are these "soul-based solutions" you are advocating? And why are they better than "ego-based solutions" (whatever those are)?

0 Replies

Quote:

You like to try and control how people argue with and respond to you, don't you?

I like to participate in discussions that have as a goal the arrival at truth, as apposed to supporting each others cherished notions and myths. When facts don't matter, when supporting documents don't matter, I know that I am not dealing with that class of people. I am not putting down all a2k'ers, only the ones who in multiple threads have shown themselves to be uninterested in truth. This is a fatal flaw for humans.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Which is, of course, to treat you like the heinous piece of garbage you are.

I can imagine a person quite reasonably and legitimately asking questions re consent...apparently in my state in new laws re sexual assault, that is going to be clarified far more..eg, as interpreted in the very crucial world of legal precedent here, a man did not have to have a REASONABLE belief that consent had been given, his belief could be quite unreasonable but would still mean that he could be considered not to have met the definition for mens rea.

Hawkeye is simply pushing a very nasty agenda here in my view, not actually wanting to have any reasonable and genuine discussion.

0 Replies

you've been putting down a2k-ers AND women from the get go.

this whole thing must be a bad bad joke.

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
You like to try and control how people argue with and respond to you, don't you?

I like to participate in discussions that have as a goal the arrival at truth, as apposed to supporting each others cherished notions and myths. When facts don't matter, when supporting documents don't matter, I know that I am not dealing with that class of people. I am not putting down all a2k'ers, only the ones who in multiple threads have shown themselves to be uninterested in truth. This is a fatal flaw for humans.

And truth, for you, is defined as believing as you do.

0 Replies

dagmaraka wrote:

you've been putting down a2k-ers AND women from the get go.

this whole thing must be a bad bad joke.

Sadly no.....these ideas are extremely prevalent and often have very serious consequences.

I was discussing hawkeye and agrote only today with a colleague who treats adult sexual offenders, (I don't treat them any more, and I know the field has moved on and is much better grounded in research now) and she was discussing how common their beliefs are in her clients.

I was interested in her view re agrote's defense of jerking off to pictures of criminal sexual assault of children to see if my view that it was a risk factor in determining which paedophiles go on to offend was as well grounded as I thought it was ....she was very clear that it is...as, interestingly enough, is adult porn. And, indeed, as are the ideas that haweye propounds a risk factor for men who go on to rape.

0 Replies

it was more of a wish than a statement, sadly.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:
However, what I want is for boundary violations to stop, for what I consider to be abuse to not happen, and i think that we can do much better at this if we change how we approach the erotic. I am in favor of mostly soul based solutions, as thus I have little interest in the ego based solutions such as legalism and morality, which have been overly used in western society and no longer work, if they ever did.

But what does that mean? How should we change the way "we approach the erotic?" What are these "soul-based solutions" you are advocating? And why are they better than "ego-based solutions" (whatever those are) ?

Quote:

ego-based solutions" (whatever those are)

I said legalism and moralism, legal as in criminalizing sex, moralism as evidence by this thread and any other place one tries to talk about this subject. Look at my words, and then the emotional disdain that they generate..this is text book moralism. Legality and morals are products of the ego, rules to keep the heart in line. However the erotic is primarily an activity of the soul, of the heart. We moderns have somehow gotten the idea that we can will what ever we want into existence and out of existence (Pres Bush is a perfect example of this type of warped human). No we can't. Sometimes the heart must be allowed dominion, even though things can get messy when the heart is in charge.

Quote:

What are these "soul-based solutions" you are advocating?

soul/heart. Soul based=feeding the heart. What does the heart want? Sometimes it wants tenderness and cooperation, sometimes it wants a fight or at least a tussle. Feeding the heart is allowing a person what makes them healthy and happy. Only they get to decide what makes them healthy and happy, not the do-gooders. If a relationship where there is never any fighting and where only tenderness is shown makes a person happy then that is what the should have. If rough sex and lots of arguing makes a person happy then that is what they should have. I don't give a **** what people outside the relationship of the individual body think is right, I care what the people in the relationship and the individuals want.

Quote:

How should we change the way "we approach the erotic?"

Move off of criminalizing sex, move off of the moralizing about what is "good" sex and "bad" sex, allow people to do what they want, what they think is best for them unless we as a society have a very good reason to mess with their lives.

0 Replies

Hawkeye, where does your philosophy stem from? What is it called? I'd like to know because it seems based it something.

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:
Quote:
You like to try and control how people argue with and respond to you, don't you?

I like to participate in discussions that have as a goal the arrival at truth, as apposed to supporting each others cherished notions and myths. When facts don't matter, when supporting documents don't matter, I know that I am not dealing with that class of people. I am not putting down all a2k'ers, only the ones who in multiple threads have shown themselves to be uninterested in truth. This is a fatal flaw for humans.

And truth, for you, is defined as believing as you do.

truth is a position that is consistent with the facts as best as they can be determined. I believe in my position because it is in line with the facts as best as I know them, and because no one has been able to bring to light facts that are opposed to my position, or to show how the facts support another version of the truth better. Nobody here has tried either, but that is another matter.

0 Replies

Rape: What is it?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know