25
   

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

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 02:55 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
Can you be more specific? I seriously am not aware of any limitations placed on what I choose to do sexually with another consenting adult.
Bill and I have talked often about the state nullifying consent on the grounds that the consent was given under what is later determined to be force, the force being either coercion or a power imbalance between the two parties. In the BSDM world I am aware of cases where this reasoning is applied but the facts dont support it, where the consent is revoked and one person (the man of course) is made a rapist for no other reason then the busy bodies did not like what two people decided to do and felt a moral obligation to stop it.

EDIT: on the non law side in almost every case where one or both parties of a non approved relationship structure or who practice none approved sexuality come in contact with institutions they will be told that what they are doing is not healthy, not right, that they should change what they do or what they are allowing to be done to them. Increasingly, the situation is taken out of the individuals hands, as mandatory reporting laws invade there right to choose for themselves.

BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:16 pm
@firefly,
Yes firefly my ex-wife was not a serous danger of being able to do great harm to myself however that still gave her zero rights to try to provoke my by slapping me.

If I had lost my cool and cause her greater harm after she had attack me with physical force I would still not be guilty of anything but self-defense.

She was the one who would had strike the first blows and therefore as an adult she is the one who should be going off to jail even if she got the worst of the conflict.

Because someone get the worst of a fight does not mean that she is a victim of that fight.
0 Replies
 
ABE5177
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:17 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
on the non law side in almost every case where one or both parties of a non approved relationship structure or who practice none approved sexuality come in contact with institutions they

what deoes that MEAN????
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:21 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
When a woman says, "No", and trys to push the man away from her, and he ignores her and inserts his penis into her vagina, he is raping her.

Can you even understand that?


And when a woman said yes and 24 hours or 5 weeks or a year later change her mind that is not rape.

When a woman say yes and in the very middle of that intercourse change her mind and it take the man a minute to understand the situation instead of 7 seconds that is not rape either.

Can you not even understand that??????

ABE5177
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:23 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
When a woman says, "No", and trys to push the man away from her, and he ignores her and inserts his penis into her vagina, he is raping her.

Can you even understand that?


And when a woman said yes and 24 hours or 5 weeks or a year later change her mind that is not rape.

Can you not even understand that??????



a year later

you a criminal BIG TIME
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:37 pm
@ABE5177,
Quote:
a year later
you a criminal BIG TIME


In the same manner as the man who had a woman jumped into his bed uninvited and begin kissing him is a rapist when she later claimed she was too drunk to know what she was doing.

The guy should had done a soberly test of some kind after she woke him up first before having sex with her it would seem.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 04:40 pm
Do I need to start a "Forum Thread Intervention" topic?
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 05:12 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
When a woman say yes and in the very middle of that intercourse change her mind and it take the man a minute to understand the situation instead of 7 seconds that is not rape either.
the understanding of the consent at the time of the act is all that can count if justice is to prevail. Neither one of the parties nor the state can be allowed to retroactively remove consent. To allow this is to abuse one of the parties. If both parties agree on accounts and the account indicates that both parties believed that the both had consented, then no crime has taken place. Those with buyers remorse should be encourage to do a better job of not getting into situations that they are not sure that they want, but otherwise no action of any kind should be taken by the collective in these cases.
joefromchicago
 
  5  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 05:58 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
the understanding of the consent at the time of the act is all that can count if justice is to prevail. Neither one of the parties nor the state can be allowed to retroactively remove consent.

Suppose I invite you into my home. You then proceed to displease me in some manner, and I ask you to leave. You refuse. Can I have you arrested for trespassing? Or would you say that, once my invitation was extended, it can never be rescinded?
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:01 pm
@joefromchicago,
When it comes down to "he said, she said," it's anybody's guess where the truth lies.
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:04 pm
@cicerone imposter,
That's true of any situation where there are only two witnesses: the accused and the purported victim. Yet somehow we've managed to handle such cases without too much difficulty for hundreds of years.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:06 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
Or would you say that, once my invitation was extended, it can never be rescinded
I did a bad quote job on Bills post. I think that any party can withdraw consent at any time for current time as well as future time. There does need to be a clear withdrawal, and a reasonable time for the other party to comply with the removal of consent. As per Bills example many pages back I dont think we can for example allow a woman to withdraw consent just before the man comes, or as he is climaxing, and expect him to pull out in 2 seconds, and if he does not hang him for rape.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:07 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
Yet somehow we've managed to handle such cases without too much difficulty for hundreds of years.
they managed to decide who to punish, whether justice prevailed or not is a whole nother kettle of fish.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:08 pm
@hawkeye10,
My thoughts, precisely!@
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:21 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
My thoughts, precisely!@
are you sure you want to be in this thread? I never took you for a radical.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:23 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

My thoughts, precisely!@
I really don't see you as the type of person that would have as much sympathy for a rapist as hawkey does.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:36 pm
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
that would have as much sympathy for a rapist as hawkey does
that is a big statement considering that I have barely talked about how much sympathy I have, and when I did said that I had "some". But then I have been told that having any sympathy for a rapist means I am a sicko, so who knows.

You people certainly were not brought up the way I was, I am puzzled by how acceptable treating rapists as pure evil has become. It seems like everyone has gone bonkers.

Me, I believe that there is good and bad in everyone, this is what I was taught, it always seems to be true. I don't question the truth of this anymore.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:47 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
And when a woman said yes and 24 hours or 5 weeks or a year later change her mind that is not rape.


Why would a woman who has had an enjoyable time with a man, and pleasurable consensual sex, want to suddenly accuse him of rape a day later? Does that make any sense? Why do you bring up such examples?

If a man has sex with a woman he doesn't know well, who might be mentally disturbed, and who might send confusing signals, isn't he taking an enormous risk? Wouldn't he "be asking" for a false rape allegation? Shouldn't men be trying to prevent themselves from being falsely accused by using better judgment about who they have sex with?

Perhaps people should get to know each other before they hop into bed. Most of the confusing consent situations being described in this thread are because the people really don't know each other.

And no one makes a rape accusation 5 weeks later. There would be no evidence of a sexual encounter, let alone a rape.

When a woman says, "No", or "Stop", why is that difficult to understand? Most of the time, that's what the woman does in a date rape situation, but the man ignores her.

Most women do make it clear what they want to do sexually and where they draw the line. If it is at all unclear to the man, he should ask her. If he doesn't get an answer that clearly indicates consent to a specific sex act, he should stop. That seems pretty simple to understand.




Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:52 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
that would have as much sympathy for a rapist as hawkey does
that is a big statement considering that I have barely talked about how much sympathy I have, and when I did said that I had "some". But then I have been told that having any sympathy for a rapist means I am a sicko, so who knows.

You people certainly were not brought up the way I was, I am puzzled by how acceptable treating rapists as pure evil has become. It seems like everyone has gone bonkers.

Me, I believe that there is good and bad in everyone, this is what I was taught, it always seems to be true. I don't question the truth of this anymore.
All anyone has done is say a rapist should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. You, on the other hand, don't believe that should be the case as you have posted ad nauseum.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 28 Jul, 2010 06:58 pm
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
All anyone has done is say a rapist should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. You, on the other hand, don't believe that should be the case as you have posted ad nauseum.
Well hell, the fullest extent of the law is to stick a needle in their arm, idiot bill in fact has said that not doing this is being too easy on them. Is that the ultimate solution?
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 03/19/2025 at 02:55:22