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

@tenderfoot,

Quote:

Fancy using the photo of three men that brought so much pleasure in the lives of those that watched them..... to designate those three arseholes who would be happy to have all women who dare to stand up to their masculinity buried up to there necks and stoned to death because of their pitiful
Concept of who and what they are --- arsholes

If you knew anything about the subject matter of this thread you would know that women are more hostile to the feminist position on rape then men are. You would also know that women practice power in sex and intimate relationship just as much as men do. You might hate men, but you cant justly blame men for the failure of the feminist position to be adopted fully in society.

This is not about Masculinity, this is about fixing a policy that has gone far off the rails, and is damaging this society greatly, to include by not limited to contributing to our financial bankruptcy.

0 Replies

@firefly,

I have cited several...as well as studies showing how prevalent it is to let a lying bitch into a court room and an innocent men be imprisoned. But you just dont get it...it is not a feminist mantra so how could you understand. When I have cited studies before you ignored them. You are an emotional rat bag choosing to be blind.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

Do you buy the tin foil by the gross?

Is that the extent of your ability to debate ? A sneer and a cut and paste ?

2 Replies

@tenderfoot,

Quote:

those three arseholes who would be happy to have all women who dare to stand up to their masculinity buried up to there necks and stoned to death

WTF ???? There is a classic example of hysteria. Poor poor pitiful women. Raped, buried up to their necks, stoned to death....should we mention periods and child birth or is that enough hysteria for one post ?

How much hysteria does it take before someone will protect you because you cant live without male protection. Wont someone help the poor poor pitiful women ?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Is that the extent of your ability to debate ? A sneer and a cut and paste ?

She ran out of anything to support her position a long time ago. I also pointed out that all she has ever had to offer is feminist propaganda, as she will not define the most central term which is "consent". Since she will not define consent and she insists that the definition of rape is the lack of consent (a very dubious new definition for rape I might add) she in fact has not defined rape. 380 pages she has posted to and she has yet to tell us what she thinks that she is talking about.

Firefly is fucked, she will not take a position because any position on what rape is that she might take will leave it very clear how far she wants to go to criminalize sexuality, which she knows we are not "ready" for yet (as in we have not been sufficiently reeducated to accept her demands) so she cant say it, but since she will not take a position she cant defend her position either. All she can do at best is keep prattling off feminist propaganda and demands that we stop confronting her with objections to it, which gets tiresome to us all so she changes things up with her comedy routine.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Your objection to the rape laws of the state in which you live, Washington, seems to boil down to exactly ONE sentence which was included in the description of rape in the 3rd degree. You allegedly have no problems with rape in the 1st and 2nd degree, because those both retain "forcible compulsion" in lieu of non consent. So, let's look at what you are making such a big deal over...

Quote:

Rape in the third degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape in the third degree when, under circumstances not constituting rape in the first or second degrees, such person engages in sexual intercourse with another person, not married to the perpetrator:

(a) Where the victim did not consent as defined in RCW 9A.44.010(7), to sexual intercourse with the perpetrator and such lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct, or

(b) Where there is threat of substantial unlawful harm to property rights of the victim.

(2) Rape in the third degree is a class C felony.

So, Hawkeye, what is your problem with defining rape as sexual intercourse without consent, where the lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct?

Are you saying that a person can never say, "NO!" to unwanted sexual intercourse--and scream, and shove, and kick--to indicate that the sexual act is unwanted?

Are you saying that it is acceptable to you to ignore the protestations of someone who does not want sexual intercourse and penetrate them anyway?

Or aren't you able to concretely evaluate the actual rape law of the state you live in--Washington--the one that you have been ranting about for 380 pages? Laughing

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Women are smaller and their greatest evolutionary weapon has been deciding who to have sex with. Not having a choice is rape. The worst women can achieve is to be raped and have no choice in what genetic material is mixed with theirs. The best women can achieve is to be absolute boss, deciding when they will be protected, changing their minds, discarding men at whim, using pussy power to dominate.

This argument is about whether women will dominate men. The Libby Lobby has never cared for equality. They attack women who play the sex game, criticise men who choose women for their sexual attractiveness and try to convince everyone that true sexual attraction only exists between an ugly woman with a brain and a "yes mummy" man.

Quote:

All she can do at best is keep prattling off feminist propaganda

Thats not true. She is a brilliant cut and pasterererer. She sees three men and thinks it must be us. A very simple connection for the very simple mind. I am surprised we havent been equated to the three blind mice because we dont have tails...what further proof is required ?

She has no arguing ability and is heavily reliant on emotion. Women who dont want to be raped had better agree with her. Sycophantic men had better agree with her.....but where is the logic of her argument ? Her argument has its strength in emotions, not reason and that means you can justify anything...even rape.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

How much hysteria does it take before someone will protect you because you cant live without male protection.

You must be referring to BillRM and Hawkeye.
They are QUITE hysterical--over-the-top hysterical. Two bigger drama queens I've never seen. Laughing

They see rape laws as a war on men, they might have to take up arms in the future, and they feel feminists are secretly planning to seize the government. A conspiracy!

http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp354/gazalajeff/junk/tin-foil-hat.jpg

And they needed male protection, because, low and behold, when they felt attacked by a woman, they needed you to come in here and protect them. Laughing

http://mamaliberty.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/heman.jpg?w=400&h=376

Some tough guys. Laughing

Scared of a sexual assault law that simply says that sexual intercourse without consent is rape. Laughing

Can't find any consenting partners, Ionus? Laughing

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

So, Hawkeye, what is your problem with defining rape as sexual intercourse without consent, where the lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct?

Are you saying that a person can never say, "NO!" to unwanted sexual intercourse--and scream, and shove, and kick--to indicate that the sexual act is unwanted?

Purposeful misdirection, as you not being a legal idiot know full well that there are a multitude of ways to violate consent in my state without the victim ever saying no. Or taking any physical action that indicates that the sex is not wanted.

Quote:

7) "Consent" means that at the time of the act of sexual intercourse or sexual contact there are actual words or conduct indicating freely given agreement to have sexual intercourse or sexual contact

According to the following attempt to educate me on the meaning of "freely given agreement" if my wife is frigid during any part of the sex act I am a rapist. Hell, maybe am a rapist according to this if I dont get her off!

Quote:

Consent requires actual words or conduct indicating a freely-given agreement to have sexual intercourse, or to participate in sexual activities.

A person must be fully conscious and able to understand what is happening to be able to give consent. Someone who is unconscious, sleeping, passed out, or incapacitated by alcohol/drugs is unable to give consent.

Consent is an ongoing process, not a one-time event. Make sure your partner is comfortable at every step of the way. If you are unsure if you have your partner’s consent, ASK! Even if you may feel embarrassed, ASK! In a healthy and respectful sexual encounter your partner will appreciate that you respect their safety and their body.

Silence is not consent. Consent is not the absence of a "no", rather the presence of a "yes". Non-responsiveness is also not consent. Just because a person does not fight back, does not mean they have given consent. If your partner is not participating, or not responding to your actions, you do not have consent. Stop, and Ask your partner whether or not you have their consent.

Neither the type of relationship (dating, intimate, married, or living together) nor the length of relationship (1 minute, 1 date, 1 year) is consent to sexual activity. You must have your partner’s consent for every sexual encounter.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://gwired.gwu.edu/saccteam/define/

but the Washington law is cut/dry and clear according to you......maybe you are not so smart after all, I have some swamp land to sell, maybe you want some??

From one of our state schools, which presumably communicates to its students the Washington state law

Quote:

Consent is an ongoing process. Consent occurs continuously and moment to moment. It is ongoing communication. Receiving an indication of interest early in the evening is not an open invitation for any type of sexual interaction later.

Being involved in a sexual relationship requires clear and direct communication skills. You will use these skills whether you are dating, married, or connecting with someone for only one night.

Each person involved in a sexual relationship is responsible for both clearly giving and clearly receiving consent.

Consent: Cues & Communication
Consent can only be given when both parties have equal power in determining the level of sexual intimacy that will/will not occur in a sexual relationship. Consent is not the absence of a "no"—it is the presence of a "yes," achieved through open communication and respect for others' sexual boundaries.

Whose responsibility is it to get consent?

It is both people's responsibility to ask for and clearly give consent for every sexual act each time it occurs. It is best to get consent before sexual contact, when both parties are sober, and in a comfortable and private place. However, this consent is not final and consent should continue as sexual acts progress.

When asking for or giving consent, it is important to be clear. Do you say one thing and mean another? Be clear and state exactly what you want. Be overly explicit and don't make assumptions.

Is your body language saying the same thing that you are? Body language can be misleading especially when it contradicts verbal messages. Consent needs to be verbal. Be verbally clear when giving consent, and when getting consent, rely on words only.

http://sexualassault.wsu.edu/default.asp?PageID=402

And ya, I have a problem with most of this. This is police state sex, not sex in the land of Hawkeye. Never will be either.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Purposeful misdirection, as you not being a legal idiot know full well that there are a multitude of ways to violate consent in my state without the victim ever saying no. Or taking any physical action that indicates that the sex is not wanted.

No, Hawkeye--this statute has nothing to do with "ways to violate consent" in fact, it refers to the absence of consent. It says when the victim did not consent, and such lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct. Perhaps you need to read it again, you don't seem to understand what it says..

Quote:

Where the victim did not consent as defined in RCW 9A.44.010(7), to sexual intercourse with the perpetrator and such lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct,

Can't you deal with the actual law? Is that one sentence description of rape in the 3rd degree too difficult or complex for you to understand? Laughing

Let me ask you again..

So, Hawkeye, what is your problem with defining rape as sexual intercourse without consent, where the lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct?

Are you saying that a person can never say, "NO!" to unwanted sexual intercourse--and scream, and shove, and kick--to indicate that the sexual act is unwanted?

Are you saying that it is acceptable to you to ignore the protestations of someone who does not want sexual intercourse and penetrate them anyway?

Or aren't you able to even understand the actual rape law of the state you live in--Washington--the one that you have been ranting about for 380 pages? Laughing

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

She has no arguing ability and is heavily reliant on emotion. Women who dont want to be raped had better agree with her. Sycophantic men had better agree with her.....but where is the logic of her argument ? Her argument has its strength in emotions, not reason and that means you can justify anything...even rape

You seem to forget that her type has teamed up with the state here in America, and she likes to advertise this alliance. I have been told by Firefly many times that unless I want to see the inside of a jail cell I had better agree with her and her pals. We are back to frontier justice around here, the one with the gun makes the rules for everyone. I am a Dinosaur, as when I was a wee tot my momma taught me that might does not make right. I am going to require a lot of reeducation, this I can see.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

...and any 'man' who condones and advocates rape is a sick piece of ****!

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

they feel feminists are secretly planning to seize the government

I dont know why they would say that when the Libby Lobby only needs to control the government not seize it.

Lets say I run the government. I am opposed to the new definition of rape where anyone can claim after sex to have been raped. You show up with your hysteria and scream that I am in favour of rape. Women FEEEEEL that it is true and vote against me. You now control the government by threat of political force. I hope this simplified version can be understood by you.

Nice cutting and pasting by the way.....are you saying the Little Rascals support rape ?????

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

I have been told by Firefly many times that unless I want to see the inside of a jail cell I had better agree with her and her pals

My "pals" must include the legislators of all 50 states, plus the governments of Canada, the U.K., and Australia--they've all passed rape laws that define sexual intercourse without consent as rape. And, yes, if you violate those laws, you might wind up in jail.

My, my, I wonder why all the citizens of all those countries aren't up in arms and carrying on about the rape laws the way that you are?
Oh, I forgot--you're the only one who knows about the "feminist conspiracy". Laughing

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

Quote:

...and any 'man' who condones and advocates rape is a sick piece of ****!

At last I have something in common with the dodderer...I agree entirely! May I repeat your words for emphasis ??.....any 'man' who condones and advocates rape is a sick piece of ****!

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

No, Hawkeye--this statute has nothing to do with "ways to violate consent" in fact, it refers to the absence of consent. It says when the victim did not consent, and such lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct. Perhaps you need to read it again, you don't seem to understand what it says

Go ahead keep playing dumb, because the take away is that you are lying....again.

"lack of consent was clearly expressed" could very easily mean that she clearly never said "yes" . There is a world of difference between needing a yes and not getting a no, and my statute supports either interpretation. The states that demand "freely given agreement" go one step further, as they will invalidate consent after the fact for a multitude of reasons that we will only know about after the fact as we are sitting in a court room at our trial. My state is being coy about what it demands, which is an abuse of the citizen. I can see why you like it though, because it will support the affirmative consent for each part of the act that feminists demand, no word changes will be required if the feminsits ever get this far. Which they will not. You will want to take out the "or action" though, becuase I know you want me to get a verbal yes for each new thing I want to do to my wife each night.

3 Replies

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

Quote:
So, rape laws are a "war against men".
At one extreme, if we had no rape laws it would be called a war against women. Why is it inappropriate to say the other extreme is a war against men ?

Quote:
And "feminists" are trying to "seize control of the government".
Are you familiar with the history of the womens movement ? Of how they threw acid in the faces of politicians and blew up buildings ? Of how they tried to damage the war effort ? Why should we believe a terrorist organisation when a spokesperson for it like you says "trust us" ?

...and this is why you advocate rape????

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Consent is not the absence of a "no"—it is the presence of a "yes," achieved through open communication and respect for others' sexual boundaries.

I wonder how many yeses you will need and at what time intervals during the sexual encounter and you also need to watch body language!

Is the college going to give courses in reading body language during sex hopefully with a lab as well as class work.

Of course if you fail the lab instead of dropping the course to retake it later they would take you to prison.

Lord having sex under those set of conditions is far more dangerous then skydiving.

Hell even horny college kids are not going to have sex under those condition as jerking off is far safer and far more enjoyable then walking that kind of a tight rope to get your rocks off.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Firefly I would lay my money on Ionue..........

Who is Ionue?

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Lord having sex under those set of conditions is far more dangerous then skydiving.

I know in the past that there were era's where the rules for interaction between the sexes were fastidious, but I think that the feminists are aiming to take the cake...or rather force us to take the cake, with a gun to our head.

0 Replies

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know