25
   

Hey, Can A Woman "Ask To Get Raped"?

 
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 10:29 pm
@Intrepid,
Quote:
You do talk about drinking a lot. Perhaps you should seek some help for that addiction as well as English lessons and professional assistance for your unusual feelings towards women and what you consider your rights to sex. You clearly do not understand what rape is and why there are laws in place to cover it.


Please take note of the lovely picture of some whore on her belly who is drunk on a couch surrounded by empty bottles that Firefly keep posting and tell me who have a fixation on alcohol and sex.

This picture according to Firefly is supposed to stand for a poor defenseless woman that we evil men are not supposed to rape even those she is driving us wild with sexual desire.

Now my reaction if I found such a drunken woman on my sofa surrounded by a few hundreds dollars worth of empty bottles of my alcohol would more then likely be to place my foot into her rear end in a non-sexual manner as I kicked her out of my house.
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 10:41 pm
@BillRM,
Side note on the drunken whore, if after I had kicked her out of my house if some sick male who is very very hard up for sex would had came along and rape her I am sure it would had been my fault by Firefly logic for kicking her out of my home in that condition not her fault for getting in that condition by drinking my whole damn alcohol supply in the first place.

It is never never the fault of a woman for her own actions it is always the fault of some man for not acting in a role of a guardian.
Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 11:05 pm
@Intrepid,
Quote:
Rape is rape.
A very intellectual statement. Why have law courts ? If women say it is, it must be...what else could it be ? Why have a jury ? If a woman says it is, what else could it be ? Rape is rape.

Your stupidity is only exceeded by your kiss arse approach to lesbians and libbies.

Quote:
Why do you always blame the woman?
If I step out in front of a truck that cant stop, I dont blame the truck. I blame myself for not looking.
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 11:16 pm
@Oylok,
Quote:
Do you really believe wives should be charged with blackmail for not having sex?
Do you really think husbands should be charged for rape if they have sex with their wives ? Why did they get married if they didnt want sex ? They could have stayed single.

For a wife to tell a husband I am not having sex with you because you didnt get me a present is blackmail and prostitution. Is there any other way to see it ?

Quote:
Do the rape reports "thrill" you?
No, because I refuse to read them. I know of a gentle woman who was raped. She told me she had to forgive for her own sake. I wanted to kill him when he came out of gaol. It appears culpa mea and barfly cant forgive and want the whole world to be a frightened terrorised place full of forboding and evil.

Quote:
When some psychopath rapes a person, what the hell else do you need to know?
I agree. All you need to know should be published when the psycho is found guilty....not before. THEN and only then are they a rapist. Before then they are innocent. You dont approve of democracy and the rule of law, do you ?
Ionus
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 11:20 pm
@Oylok,
Quote:
I'm not the one in favour of a thread about prison rape.
Of course not. Do you know your reasons ? I suspect they are because you dont want rape looked at as a crime with victims, you want it solely as a political weapon for the libby lobby. You dont want to talk about the majority of rapes because it detracts from poor poor pitiful women and period pains and childbirth and ......it must be a living hell for females of all species.....how they must suffer......or not. Possibly not.
Ionus
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 11:26 pm
@Intrepid,
Quote:
You clearly do not understand what rape is and why there are laws in place to cover it.
You clearly do not understand why these laws are different. 14 yrs of age in Japan, 16 yrs of age in Australia, 18 yrs of age in the USA and we wont go into the different definitions of rape in various states. A magic marker on the ground can mean a difference of 20 yrs of a man's life.

If there were equivalent laws biased against women there would be bra burnings and rampant hysteria. They wouldnt stand for laws so brazenly anti-women.

Yet here we are with all the kiss arse men patting little hands and saying "there there...you poor thing...you are only a 32 yr old child.....you didnt know alcohol could have that effect.....if you drive a car that drunk of course its not your fault...the car forced you...."
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 11:34 pm
Rape is non consensual sexual intercourse...in Canada it is simply called "sexual assault".

Quote:

Campaign launched to focus on alcohol-facilitated sexual assaults
Fri Nov. 19 2010

Edmonton police and SAVE (Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton) are launching a new marketing campaign they hope will get people talking. The "Don't be that Guy" campaign focuses on the issue of alcohol-facilitated sexual assaults in our city.

Recently, police reported that has been an increase in alcohol-facilitated sexual assaults.

"A person that is drunk or passed out cannot give consent," said Supt. Danielle Campbell with the Edmonton Police Service. "Sex without consent is sexual assault."

The "Don't be that Guy" campaign will be aimed at the offender, and not the victim.

"We need to educate young men that sex without consent is not only highly inappropriate but it is against the law," said Karen Smith, the executive director of the Sexual Assault Centre.


Advertisements that use some strong language and detailed images will be posted above urinals in the Edmonton bar districts, at LRT stations, and print ads will be seen in the University of Alberta and Grant MacEwan University newspapers as well as entertainment magazines like SEE and VUE.

The ads will target a specific audience of males between the ages of 18 to 24. And for some at the University of Alberta the message hits home.

"Probably the most effective part is this right here - Don't be That Guy. Because every guy, kinda...they think that way, especially when they've had a couple beers," said University of Alberta student Tony Travanut.

The campaign begins Monday and runs through until January 27, 2011.

SAVE group members include the Sexual Assault Centre of Edmonton, the Edmonton Police Service, the University of Alberta Sexual Assault Centre, Saffron Centre of Sherwood Park, Convenant Health Prevention of Alcohol Related Trauma in Youth (PARTY Program), Responsible Hospitality Edmonton, Red Cross, Prostitution Awareness and Action Foundation of Edmonton (PAAFE), University of Alberta Women's Studies, and community advocates.
http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20101119/edm_police_101119/20101119/?hub=EdmontonHome


Quote:

Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton

Why our campaign is different

Typically, sexual assault awareness campaigns target potential victims by urging women to restrict their behavior. Research is telling us that targeting the behavior of victims is not only ineffective, but also contributes to how much they blame themselves after the assault. That's why our campaign is targeting potential offenders - they are the ones responsible for the assault and responsible for stopping it. By addressing alcohol-facilitated sexual assault without victim-blaming, we intend to mark Edmonton on the map as a model for other cities.
http://www.sexualassaultvoices.com/index.html

http://www.sexualassaultvoices.com/uploads/5/0/9/9/5099312/2288399.jpg
Ionus
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 11:38 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
"A person that is drunk or passed out cannot give consent," said Supt. Danielle Campbell with the Edmonton Police Service.
Therein lies an anomaly in the law. If a woman can drive and be charged with knowingly drink driving, why cant she consent to sex ?
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 11:41 pm
Here is an interesting thread...

http://able2know.org/topic/164768-1#post-4431039

I will be interested to see the reaction of some of the women on this thread.
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 3 Dec, 2010 11:43 pm
@firefly,
Once more Firefly when are we going to be charging a woman with the crime of having sex with a drunken man??????????

Just because he is both male and drunk does not mean that he went to **** you!

Oh sorry men are suppose to look after themselves and not be a child unlike women.

PS should I had written f@@k instead of **** like the women groups do?

Can the women on this group stand to see the **** word used without the cute @@?

Of course it never never safe to assume that you can treat women as adults instead of children.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 12:03 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
If a woman can drive and be charged with knowingly drink driving, why cant she consent to sex ?
There you go using that logic again...Naughty-Naughty boy....
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 12:05 am
On the same subject of drunken men and rape what male here had not ended up at one time or another having sex with a woman that they would never dream of having sex with but for too must alcohol in the system?

For males it is a amusing story to share with other men such as lord did you see the dog I ended up going home with last night? I just need to cut down on my drinking.

For a woman lord the guy saw I was drunk and we went home together and as I would never had have sex with him without being under the influence he must had rape me.

Same event but we for some reason are granting women the right not to take responsibility for their own actions and finding excuses that it someone else fault that would never fly for a male.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 12:11 am
@Arella Mae,
Quote:

Hawkeye has admitted to rape? Lord have mercy. Thank God I am not responding to him.
No, that post was part of a multi post conversation where we were talking about the nutty rape feminist definition of rape, such as having sex with a person who has consumed alcohol is rape. I was saying that according to the definition that the fanatics use I have raped and been raped and recommend the experience and dont plan to stop. If the 20 times that I have clarified my position on breaking current rape laws did not enlighten you as to what I was talking about me blithely saying that I have been raped and highly recommend the experience should have given you a clue, but then my impression is that you aint the sharpest pencil in the box.

Firefly on the other hand lacks the required integrity to tell the truth.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 12:24 am
@mysteryman,
The women here will never go near that posting as it would be far too upsetting to their world view of evil males and stupid and defenseless female victims of the evil males.

Thank for posting it in any case and here is the post text that you had link to.

hi,

ok, a while ago I was on holiday is portugal with some friends. One night I went out and got very very drunk. (as lads do on holiday) I was so drunk I can barely remember anything from the evening. However according to friends when I got home and went to sleep they brought a few girls back with them. The girls came into my room and woke me up. My friends have told me that she keep rubbing my chest and asking me to sleep with her and I kept saying no (again I cant remember anything). My friends also told me that they left me alone in the room with the girl. Now I still cant remember this but when I woke up the following morning all I could remember was her keep asking me for sex and trying to touch me sexually. And me keep saying no. However I can remember her telling me that I have cummed on her hand. Here comes the worst part. I have and had a girlfriend at the time. I have since been so traumitised and frightened of losing the girl I love. I have been for counselling, been on medication and my lifes been hell. I have not told my girlfriend because I am frightened of losing her. My question is this. was it rape, or am I in the wrong. Because I can honestly barely remember a thing and it is starting to ruin my life.

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 12:40 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
If a woman can drive and be charged with knowingly drink driving, why cant she consent to sex ?

I am responding to this only because your basic understanding of laws is so deficient. Otherwise I really prefer to ignore your posts.

If arrested on DWI, the charge is not, "knowingly drink driving"--it is simply driving while intoxicated (or drink driving)--i.e. operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level above a certain legal limit. It has nothing to do with whether the driver "knows" or understands anything.

And the reason we have drunk driving laws is because people who are legally intoxicated are not considered competent to drive safely--their judgment, cognitive abilities, perceptions, reaction times, etc. are all impaired.

Very intoxicated people cannot legally knowingly consent because they are in a very impaired state--they may not even be fully conscious.

You also do not understand the rape laws, or even the legal definition of rape. The age of consent may differ from place to place, but AOC simply determines the minimum age to be able to give consent.
In the U.S., and the U.K., rape is non consensual sex. In Australia, where you apparently live, it is also non consensual sex.
Quote:
The definition of rape in Australia varies between the States and Territories; however, in each jurisdiction acts of non-consensual sexual penetration of both men and women are considered rape.
http://www.virtualmedicalcentre.com/healthandlifestyle.asp?sid=42





hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 12:47 am
@firefly,
Quote:
Very intoxicated people cannot legally knowingly consent because they are in a very impaired state--they may not even be fully conscious
Right, and when they try to drive in that condition they are held responsible and are given a substantial penalty....so the question is, why aren't we consistent? Why isn't drunk driving considered temporary non-responsibility just like drunken sex is for the one with the hole (the one with the pole is however always responsible, so much for equality!)?

I know that you are not stupid...you knew just what Ionus was meaning, you are just dishonest...you play dumb when you think it will get you what you want.
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 12:48 am
@firefly,
Quote:
You also do not understand the rape laws, or even the legal definition of rape


This comment from a woman who at one point on this thread was trying to sell the theory that women because they lack a penis can not be guilty of rape.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 01:10 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Why isn't drunk driving considered temporary non-responsibility just like drunken sex is for the one with the hole (the one with the pole is however always responsible, so much for equality!)?


Intoxication cannot be used as an excuse for breaking a law.

Intoxication cannot be used as an excuse for DWI--a drunk driver is responsible for breaking the law.

Intoxication cannot be used as an excuse for rape--a drunk rapist is responsible for breaking the law.

A woman who just gets drunk isn't breaking any laws. It is the person who rapes her who breaks the law.

What do you want to hold the woman "responsible" for--being drunk and available to a rapist? She's not the one who commits the rape.

Are you playing dumb, or are you really that stupid?
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 01:25 am
I know you guys will appreciate this one...

Here is a rapist who is trying to invalid his guilty plea because he claims he was high on drugs when he "consented" to it. So, he feels his admission of guilt (or "consent") was invalid...

Quote:
OC Cop Who Targeted Undocumented Workers For Rapes Changes Plea
By R. Scott Moxley,
Tue., Oct. 5 2010

​Though he was on the verge of retiring after working more than 30 years as a police officer in 2005, Bradley Stewart Wagner couldn't help using his enormous state-given powers on the streets near Anaheim's Disneyland to satisfy his criminal sexual fantasies.

We now know of three Spanish-speaking, undocumented workers who identified an on-duty Wagner as their assailant in a scheme that involved the officer stopping the female drivers late at night, threatening deportation and then using them for rough public sex.

(Wagner was so rough with the women that one of them had to have dental work after he forced her to perform oral sex on him, according to court records.)

We also know the women were telling the truth not just because of solid DNA evidence and eyewitness accounts, but also because in May Wagner and Jennifer Keller, his veteran defense lawyer, admitted in open court that he was guilty before his trial.

Wagner's crimes carried a maximum 11.5-year prison sentence and lifetime sexual predator registration. The plea deal reduced his punishment to just four years of incarceration.

"Are you pleading guilty freely and voluntarily and because you are, in fact, guilty?" Judge Walter Schwarm asked Wagner in open court on May 17.

"Yes," Wagner, who'd left the police department, replied before answering the next five questions each with a single word: "Guilty."

But, according to sexual assault prosecutor Lynda Fernandez, Wagner--who has delayed the formal sentencing date for four consecutive months by claiming medical excuses--now is asking a judge to rescind his admissions. He claims he was high on drugs when he admitted his guilt.

Wagner says he's really innocent.

Fernandez is not impressed, noting that there was no indication that Wagner was under the influence during his confession hearing.

"It would appear that the real reason the defendant wants to withdraw his plea is buyer's remorse and fear," Fernandez wrote in a recent brief opposing Wagner's plea change. "However, a defendant's fear, regret or post-plea apprehension is not a good cause . . . There are three victims in this case. They have been waiting for nearly five years for justice."
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2010/10/oc_cop_who_targeted_undocument.php


And this is the latest in that case...

Quote:
Creepy" Anaheim Cop/Rapist Gets Nailed By His Own Defense Lawyer
By R. Scott Moxley
Fri., Dec. 3 2010

Add "cheap" and "pitifully subservient" to the long, disgusting list of descriptions--rapist, habitual liar, dirty cop, drug addict--you can say about Bradley Stewart Wagner, the veteran Anaheim officer who repeatedly used his badge in a sex-crimes scheme that targeted illegal-immigrant women working around Disneyland.

We have the new understanding of Wagner because Jennifer Keller, his onetime defense attorney, offered sensational testimony against him today in Superior Court Judge Walter P. Schwarm's Santa Ana courtroom.

According to Keller, Wagner kept lying and changing stories about his acts with various women he'd pulled over under false pretenses because, in large part, he was frightened of his wife's reactions.

"After all the years [as her client]--five years--he'd not been able to give me a straight answer," Keller testified, noting that his stories always changed when his wife was present. "[When Wagner agreed to plead guilty in exchange for favorable treatment, his wife] was crying, screaming, throwing herself to the linoleum, sobbing. . . . She was just more distraught than I'd ever seen any spouse [of a defendant] in my career."

Keller, one of Southern California's leading defense lawyers, also said Wagner had expressed more concern about losing his lucrative police pension and possibly having to pay his victims restitution for their medical expenses than going to prison, though he did express concern that he might be "toast" should he encounter an inmate he'd arrested.

Why would Keller publicly turn on her defendant?

Wagner now claims the guilty plea he entered last year should be legally void because Keller was professionally incompetent and, besides, he was high on drugs when he signed it in the courthouse. The claims--which, honestly, strain all sense of credibility--have repeatedly postponed sentencing in a case that has dragged on for half a decade.

Keller testified she spent "at least" 90 minutes "going over each line" in the plea agreement with Wagner and "never" noticed any signs that her client was mentally impaired. For example, she said, he did not slur his speech or ramble on unrelated topics. Indeed, according to Keller, he asked good questions and lobbied her to seek a better sweetheart deal. He was exposed to an 11.5-year prison sentence, but Keller had already managed to reduce it to just four years.

In response, Robert Z. Corrado, who has taken over as Wagner's defense counsel, asked Keller if she is a certified drug-recognition expert. But the smart-ass line fell flat when Keller noted she'd spent eight years as a public defender and had first-hand experience with drugged clients.

Wagner is asking Schwarm for permission to withdraw his guilty plea and go to trial. A decision is expected on Dec. 16.

But Keller made it clear Wagner's chances of winning over a jury are zero.

While working on his defense, Keller testified, she once asked him, "How much more are you going to lie?"

Regarding one of the victims that Wagner targeted in the middle of the night, Keller said, she advised the cop that jurors would not accept his "highly unlikely" story that a woman had ended a 12-hour shift in the wee hours of the night and "then tried to strike up a romance" with him.

The evidence possessed by prosecutor Lynda Fernandez was so substantial, Keller noted, that she eventually concluded it was not "humanly possible" for a future jury to accept stories Wagner planned to concoct on the witness stand.

According to Keller--who is law partners with Kay Rackauckas, ex-wife of DA Tony Rackauckas--jurors were more likely to find an illegal immigrant more credible and believable because they would find him to be "a creepy cop."
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2010/12/creepy_anaheim_coprapist_gets.php
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 4 Dec, 2010 01:34 am
@firefly,
Quote:
Intoxication cannot be used as an excuse for breaking a law.

nice misdirection. The problem on the table is that intoxication is being used as an excuse to evade responsibility for ones sexual practices if one is lucky enough to be born female, but does not for evading responsibility for getting behind the wheel. The law is not consistent, the law appears to be broken, so you claiming that intoxication is not an excuse for evading the law has nothing to do with anything ...you know that of course, but you do love to spin the dishonest and empty rhetoric....
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 07/17/2025 at 02:49:10