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

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Published June 2009
Chapter 7. Judicial Responses
Section 10 — How many ALLEGED abusers violate court protective orders?
Research varies, but violation rates have been found to range from 23 percent over two years [26], 35 percent within six months [133], to 60 percent within twelve months [105], and in between at 48.8 percent within two years.IE We dont have the first ******* clue what the answer is

You will see this unjust assumption of guilt of those who are fingered by alleged victims spread though most all discussion on the subject of abuse, even from the government which is ordered by the law of the land ( the Constitution) to assume innocents until guilt is proven. Our government REFUSES to follow the law!

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

from the feminists who run sex law

You mean all those male state legislators who wrote and enacted the state sexual assault laws?

Quote:

and it only in the last few years as men's rights groups come to power

What cave do you live in? This entire society has been devoted to "men's rights" until relatively recently. Women in the U.S. didn't even have the right to vote until 1920. With all your bitching about your "rights" do you even understand what it means not to have the right to vote? And wide-scale discrimination against women wasn't even addressed until the 1960's.

Sorry, all your whining about "injustice to men" does not change the fact that, overwhelmingly, women, rather than men, are the victims of sexual violence and domestic violence. And there is plenty of research on that score.

This thread, however, is not about domestic violence or the general topic of violence toward women. I believe there is another thread on the boards that addresses that topic.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Sorry, all your whining about "injustice to men" does not change the fact that, overwhelmingly, women, rather than men, are the victims of sexual violence and domestic violence. And there is plenty of research on that score

Wrong, we proved beyond doubt in this thread that men and women are equally aggressive and transgressive (IE ABUSIVE) in relationship. Men do more physical damage because we tend to be bigger and use more physical force more, women more emotionally abusive. It was a neat trick of the feminists to try to redefine abuse to mean only physical trangression, but we (America)did not buy it, as common sense it still too strong for the some of Bull **** that the feminist try to float..

It did not help that at the very same time that the feminists were trying to define relationship abuse as only the physical because that definition benefits women they were busy trying to move the definition of child abuse to include a lot more emotional transgressions, or even in allowing kids to see some of the nastlier parts of humanity. People will recall the feminists of ten years ago claiming that allowing a child to hear their parents fighting was an act of child abuse. America gave that Bull **** the heave-ho. The feminists can't have it both ways, the elementary lack of logic of their position on what is abuse did them in.

Quote:

This thread, however, is not about domestic violence or the general topic of violence toward women. I believe there is another thread on the boards that addresses that topic.

This thread has been about a lot of interconnected subjects, to include those two. I fully expect that you have had in your life a lot of practice in rewritting history, but you cant get away with that here.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Wrong, we proved beyond doubt in this thread that men and women are equally aggressive and transgressive (IE ABUSIVE) in relationship

No, you never "proved" any such thing. Nor am I interested in discussing it with you because it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

Quote:

Men do more physical damage because we tend to be bigger and use more physical force more, women more emotionally abusive.

Plenty of men are emotionally and verbally abusive. In France (that country you see as being so much better than the U.S.) they recently passed a law prohibiting psychological violence/abuse of partners--aimed mainly at giving women better protection from domestic violence.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/26/french-jail-psychological-abuse-partners

It is precisely because men tend to be bigger, and to use aggressive physical force more, that they will be arrested more often than women for violent crimes, including violence against other men. Laws against assaults--both physical and sexual assaults--were around long before women even got the vote, and definitely long before "feminists" were even born. Aggressive physical "transgressions" have always been considered criminal, and original notions of justice were "an eye for an eye...".

There is no connection, at all, between domestic violence and the topic of this thread, except as it pertains to spousal rape.

The topic of this thread deals with sexual assaults, most of which are committed by men. The fact that most of those arrested under sexual assault laws will be male hardly constitutes an "injustice" toward men, given the fact that males account for most of the perpetrators. Females are also prosecuted under these laws.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Plenty of men are emotionally and verbally abusive. In France (that country you see as being so much better than the U.S.) they recently passed a law prohibiting psychological violence/abuse of partners--aimed mainly at giving women better protection from domestic violence

It was sold on the basis of protecting women more, whether the French know that it is women who tend to be the most emotionally and verbally abusive IDK. This law is a train wreck an is consistent with a whole host of EU nanny state moves in recent decades. In America we are better off, and we will roll back the Nanny State, which the Europeans might or might not do.

Relevant is this

Quote:

Dr. STOSNY: Well, psychological abuse is very prevalent. It's probably -about one in four relationships go through some period where they will have psychological abuse.

NORRIS: One in four?

Dr. STOSNY: Yes. It's a precursor to violence; about 40 percent of them will become domestic violence. But psychologically speaking, it actually does more damage than physical abuse. The only time that's not true is if the physical abuse does some kind of crippling or maiming or disfigurement. Otherwise, psychological abuse is more - has more psychological effects. You feel worse about yourself for longer.

NORRIS: What kind of toll does it take over time, then?

Dr. STOSNY: It impairs your ability to sustain interest, trust, compassion and love. In another words, you can't love without hurt. We are actually programmed to believe what people we love say and how they treat us, to be about us. I call it the mirror of love. The only way you know how lovable you are, and how valuable your love is to other people, is by interacting with people you love. So if somebody hits you, it's a little bit easier to see that that person has a problem, at least an impulse-control problem. But when they're demeaning you or making you feel inferior, you're actually psychologically programmed to believe that's your problem.

NORRIS: Are there triggers?

Dr. STOSNY: Yes. There is an interesting gender distinction of whether a man is abusive or a woman is abusive. If a woman is abusive, she will usually hit the male vulnerabilities of dread of failure as a provider, protector, lover or parent. So she will say, you know, I could have married somebody who made more money than you. I had better sex with my last boyfriend. You're a terrible parent, and I don't feel secure with you. When a man is abusive, he tends to hit fear vulnerabilities. He'll make her afraid that he is going to hurt her, or he'll trigger her fear of isolation that nobody will love you, nobody will care about you; and her fear of deprivation: She can't have a nest, she can't buy anything for the house, she can't buy anything for herself.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122372371

and this

Quote:

A 2005 study by Hamel[9] reports that "men and women physically and emotionally abuse each other at equal rates". Basile[10] found that psychological aggression was effectively bidirectional in cases where heterosexual and homosexual couples went to court for domestic disturbances. A 2007 study of Spanish college students (n = 1,886) aged 18–27 [11] found that psychological aggression (as measured by the Conflict Tactics Scale) is so pervasive in dating relationships that it can be regarded as a normalized element of dating, and that women are substantially more likely to exhibit psychological aggression. Similar findings have been reported in other studies.[12] Strauss et al.[13] found that female intimate partners in heterosexual relationships were more likely than males to use psychological aggression, including threats to hit or throw an object. A study of young adults (N = 721) by Giordano et al.[14] found that females in intimate heterosexual relationships were more likely than males to threaten to use a knife or gun against their partner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_abuse

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

I had the feeling at the time that my ex-wife was whaling away at me that she wished me to desk her to give her a far better position in any divorce settlement.

Not being a mind reader I can never be sure however the fact that she still ran to the court to falsely stated that I had used violence on her seems to be an indication that she would had love me to had given her a black eye or a blooded lip.

In any case my life long conditioning never to hit a woman held that afternoon even if I can not now say by how must.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

I had the feeling at the time that my ex-wife was whaling away at me that she wished me to desk her to give her a far better position in any divorce settlement

Could have been, but the more likely scenario is that she was trying to provoke you into doing something that you would not normally do. It is very common for women to use their emotional abuse skills trying to get guys to take swings at them, as this is a way of proving to themselves and to their man their power over their man, but of course we are not supposed to talk about that..

Quote:

In any case my life long conditioning never to hit a woman held that afternoon even if I can not now say by how must

I dont hold by that, my code is that I will never hit a woman unless she hits me first. If I am bigger than her and my hit hurts her more then that is too ******* bad....she should have thought of that before she hit me . She can take the size difference up with God, it is not my fault. I will not be verbally provoked into hitting a woman. I dont understand you guys who refuse to hit a woman no matter what...you act like the equal rights movement never happened , like women are still owed the benefits of the old chivalry code of behavior even after it is completely clear that they feel free to be a bitch.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

First Hawkeye I grow up in the 50s and 60s and I am talking about family/society conditionings not logic.

Next if a woman pulled a knife or a gun or launch some other attack of a nature where she could end up doing serous harm to me I would have no problem defensing myself with whatever force seems needed at the time.

However if a woman attack me in a manner where it is highly unlikely she could cause me any real harm I do not see the point in desking her instead of just controlling her.

Thankfully my wife is not into violence so my self control is not likely to be tested in the future.

0 Replies

Take a look at the nonsense that women will play on the courts with the aid of their lawyers and others and take note the ending where the woman lawyer stated over well the courts are still unlikely to reverse the harm done this man.

Yes women are inherently must more trueful then evil men and their words should be given full faith and credit until proven beyond question that they are lying.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dui-setup-20111017,0,55239,full.story

Coming clean on 'dirty DUIs' in Contra Costa County
A whistle-blower tells how a private detective arranged for men to be arrested for drunk driving at the behest of their ex-wives and their lawyers — and that entrapment using decoys was only one of many alleged misdeeds.

David Dutcher says his 2008 arrest on suspicion of drunk driving was a setup orchestrated by a private detective who is the subject of a state and federal criminal investigation. (Michael Macor, The Chronicle / October 17, 2011)

October 16, 2011, 8:07 p.m.
Reporting from Martinez, Calif.— David Dutcher met Sharon on Match.com in late 2008, a few months after separating from his wife. "We had a lot in common," he recalled. Sharon loved four-wheel-drive trucks and sports.

They met for coffee, then dinner. Sharon was tall, slender, blond and beautiful. She moaned that she had not had sex in a long time. She told him he had large, strong hands and wondered if that portended other things. She described his kisses as "yummy."

"It felt a lot like Christmas," said Dutcher, 49, a tall, burly engineer with wavy red hair.

On their second date, Sharon suggested they join one of her friends "who was partying because she had closed a real estate deal," Dutcher said. They drove to an Italian restaurant in a suburb near San Francisco. Sharon's friend, "Tash," was a loud and raucous brunet who was pounding down shots.

The women fiddled with Dutcher's tie and massaged his neck and shoulders. The brunet unbuttoned her blouse to reveal generous cleavage. "I am way over my head with these girls," he remembered thinking. "I hadn't been out dating in a while."

Sharon had trouble finishing her tequila shots and asked Dutcher to help, he said. When the women went to the bathroom, two men at the other end of the bar peppered Dutcher with questions.

"Are you a celebrity?" they wanted to know.

The women suggested going to a house with a hot tub that Tash was housesitting, Dutcher said. He followed them in his truck. Within a few minutes, a flashing red light appeared in his rearview mirror. The officer said he had been swerving.

Three months later, Dutcher's wife filed a motion in their divorce case, telling the court that her soon-to-be former husband had been arrested on suspicion of drunk driving and that she feared for their children's safety. The judge ordered that Dutcher's visits be supervised.

Then, earlier this year, Dutcher received a letter from Contra Costa County Senior Deputy Dist. Atty. Harold W. Jewett. It contained a transcript of a police interview with Christopher Butler, a private detective and the subject of a state and federal criminal investigation.

"I hope in some small way this information will help you recoup both rights and dignities lost in one of the most deplorable legal practices I have ever heard of," Jewett wrote.

::

Dutcher had been duped.

The women who'd ogled him worked for Butler's detective agency. Sharon, who told Dutcher she was a divorcee employed by an investment firm, actually was a former Las Vegas showgirl.

A man who once worked for Butler had blown the whistle. He told authorities Butler arranged for men to be arrested for drunk driving at the behest of their ex-wives and their divorce lawyers — and that entrapment was only one of many alleged misdeeds.

Butler, 49, a former police officer, was arrested in February. In addition to setting up at least five DUIs, he sold drugs for law enforcement officers and helped them open and operate a brothel, collecting and delivering the profits, according to prosecutors and a statement Butler gave them after his arrest.

In the March 15 statement obtained by The Times, Butler said his accomplices reasoned that they could shield their illegal businesses because any complaints would be investigated by a state-run narcotics task force, which one of the officers headed.

The alleged crimes implicated three different law enforcement agencies — the San Ramon and Danville police departments and the narcotics task force — and took place in Contra Costa County, a collection of mostly middle-class communities that stretch from the East Bay shoreline opposite San Francisco to upscale suburbs inland.

Jewett called the scandal a "sordid drama" that overwhelmed the resources of the county and raised potential conflicts for police departments being asked to investigate their own.

In May, the FBI took over the probe, interviewing Dutcher and other ex-husbands arrested on suspicion of drunk driving. A federal grand jury indicted Butler and two of the officers in August and September. The charges included drug dealing, running a prostitution business and illegal possession of a weapon.

More indictments are expected. A third officer, implicated by Butler in the DUIs, faces state charges of accepting bribes to make arrests.

Stunned prosecutors combed through pending criminal cases and eventually dismissed charges in at least 20 DUI and vice crimes, tainted by the involvement of the accused officers. Two of them had once worked with Butler on the police force of the East Bay city of Antioch.

Butler also apparently hoodwinked reporters. His agency received national attention for employing gumshoe "housewives" who juggled soccer games with undercover spying. People magazine and Dr. Phil did stories. An East Bay magazine reporter who went on a ride-along with Butler later discovered that everything he had witnessed had been staged.

In what prosecutors now call "dirty DUIs," Butler paid his decoys $25 an hour for four-hour minimums. The women worked in pairs. One drank heavily with the target and the other drove.

Butler videotaped the encounters from a nearby table. When the man got into his vehicle, Butler tipped off police. The last DUI setup occurred in January.

Susan Dutcher, a substitute schoolteacher, said in a sworn declaration that she paid Butler $2,500 to obtain evidence that her husband drove while drinking. She insisted she did not authorize Butler to have him arrested because she did not want to imperil his job and his ability to pay child support.

Her lawyer's paralegal, who had recommended Butler, "made this all seem completely legal and as though it was standard practice" in divorce cases, she said.

Once Dutcher got into his truck, Butler called a police officer friend to report Dutcher had been drinking. Butler maintained the officer was not paid by him and did not know Dutcher had been set up. The officer, who has not been charged, later went to work for Butler.::

Dutcher, an avionics engineer who works on rockets, said he was dumbfounded when he learned what happened. After his arrest, he could not get the heightened security clearance he needed for certain jobs.

Driven by anger and embarrassment, he contacted others he had learned had been set up, including Declan Woods, a contractor arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence in 2007. Woods' ex-wife was represented by Mary Nolan, the same divorce attorney who worked for Susan Dutcher.

Butler told prosecutors the attorney referred him to Susan Dutcher because she was thrilled with his performance in the Woods case. In a sworn court declaration, Nolan denied having anything to do with hiring Butler in the Dutcher case; she could not be reached for comment about Woods' arrest.

Woods' ordeal began with a call for a kitchen remodel estimate. The prospective client turned out to be an attractive, flirtatious brunet. She told him she was new in town, a writer, and wondered what he was doing that night. He said he planned to grab dinner at a local cafe.

"Hey, this chick is picking up on me," Woods joked to his business partner after the two men met with her.

The woman showed up with a friend that evening. They went to a nearby bar, where the three drank lemon drops.

Woods said in an interview that the brunet was so aggressive he twice pushed her off his lap. Calm yourself, calm yourself, he remembered telling her. Looking back, he said, he should have realized something was wrong.

"Things like that don't happen to blokes like me," said the British-born Woods. "But the alcohol kicks in, you are having a good time, and you think, what the hell."

The women suggested going to a house with a hot tub. Woods hopped into his truck and followed them. He was pulled over almost immediately. "I have been set up," he remembered telling the officer.

Prosecutors offered to help Dutcher and Woods remove their DUI convictions and approved the dismissal of charges against the three other men. Dutcher obtained a court order last month to expunge his conviction.

Even though the men had been drinking, prosecutors said Butler's stings violated a little-used 19th century law that makes it a felony to conspire to subject another person to arrest. The female decoys have not been charged.

Woods said the arrest hurt his business and cost him thousands of dollars in fines. His ex-wife declined to discuss the case but said she did not authorize Butler to have Woods arrested.

Dutcher has worked long hours seeking vindication. After spending nearly $30,000 on an attorney, he decided to represent himself in an attempt to overturn the divorce and custody agreement he signed last year. He said his ex-wife had him "over the barrel" after the DUI.

M. Pamela Lauser, Susan Dutcher's current lawyer, doubts Dutcher will succeed. "Nobody held a gun to his head," she said of his drunk driving arrest. "Nobody forced him to drink.... The guy was drunk and he was driving. How is that a dirty DUI?"

Dutcher agreed he "made a terrible mistake."

A trial date on the divorce settlement is set for Nov. 17.

[email protected].

0 Replies

Quote:

Cyber anarchists blamed for unleashing a series of Facebook 'rape pages'

A shadowy network of “cyber-anarchists” has been linked to a proliferation of controversial “rape pages” on Facebook that are drawing millions of users, including many young Britons, Australians and Americans, to the social networking site.

By Philip Sherwell, New York
16 Oct 2011

Nobody knows better than MJ Stephens that rape is no laughing matter. So as the survivor of a sexual assault, she was horrified when she encountered the contents of a Facebook page full of jokes about rape and violence towards women.

But worse was to come when the young American woman tried to argue with the people who had attached their comments to the page called "You know shes [sic] playing hard to get when your [sic] chasing her down an alleyway" - most of them teenagers and young adults from Britain and Australia.

In sickeningly explicit terms, several of them threatened her and expressed the wish that she be raped again.

Such pages, full of ugliness, aggression and pornographic language are multiplying on Facebook, drawing lucrative user traffic to the social networking site.

Now it has emerged that one of the "administrators" of the page - users with the right to edit its content - is believed to be a British schoolboy linked to a network of hackers in Britain, Australia and America who have set up Facebook pages featuring offensive sexual and violent content.

Micheal O'Brien, a Canadian computer systems engineer who co-founded the Rape Is No Joke (RINJ) campaign to pressure Facebook to delete "rape pages" via petitions and boycotts, has tracked the activity on several such pages and contacted participants online.

He told The Sunday Telegraph that associates of 4chan, a loose-knit collection of international "cyber-anarchists" who champion absolute online freedom, including for some the right to share pornography, have founded and administer several of the pages.

The RINJ's own website has been attacked by hackers and campaigners have been subjected to virulent online onslaughts since they started to draw attention to the 4chan connection last week. Pro-4chan images have also been posted to the "alleyway" page.

Facebook protects the identity of those who set up and run pages. But Mr O'Brien has identified several posters as likely page administrators, including a teenage boy in Britain and college students in Australia.

With nearly 210,000 people indicating that they "like" it, and many million of monthly visitors, the "alleyway" page is the most popular. Others include "Abducting, raping and violently murdering your friend as a joke", "Pinning your mate down while someone HIV positive rapes him for a laugh", "Police call it a restraining order, we call it playing hard to get" and "Turning into a chain smoking sexual predator when you drink".

Many of the regular users who "post" on the pages are young Britons and Australians - many of them still at school, judging from information on their own Facebook profile pages. The website allows any child aged 13 or older is allowed to open an account.

Activists and victims' support groups in Britain and America, where Facebook is based, have urged the social networking site to shut down and remove the pages. But despite an online petition signed by more than 200,000 people worldwide, the internet giant is refusing to do so.

Facebook did not respond to repeated requests for comment by The Sunday Telegraph. But in response to previous complaints about the pages, the company has said that while they may express "outrageous or offensive" opinions, they do not violate its rules banning content that is hateful or incites violence.

"It is very important to point out that what one person finds offensive, another can find entertaining," a spokesman said. "Just as telling a rude joke won't get you thrown out of your local pub, it won't get you thrown off Facebook."

An administrator of the "rape page" posted an online defence in response to the controversy, insisting that he did not support or promote rape but then directing a sarcastic barb at critics.

"i d[o] not support rape this group doesn't," the person wrote, with a lack of grammar and in internet shorthand characteristic of many postings. "thanks for supporting us uve made us get even more likes i thank u for that but this group has not dne anything wrong according to theterms and cnditions f facebook groups s if it does get taken down it will result in court because it has done nothing wrong."

Facebook's refusal to remove the pages has outraged campaigners and victim support groups in Britain and America. "It's ludicrous to compare the content on this page to pub humour," said Jane Osmond, co-editor of the Women's Views on News website that has led the campaign in Britain.

"Rape is a crime and we live in a society where the threat of rape is in the mind of every woman who has walked down a street alone at night. Making a joke about rape is not just not funny, it allows people to dismiss it as something not serious.

"The page has become a receptacle for hateful threatening language that singles out women. Children as young as 13 can access this page. It is unacceptable."

Miss Stephens, who lives in New Mexico and is part of the RINJ campaign, was equally shocked by Facebook's attitude. "I was horrified to find content so graphically violent towards women and it blatantly breaches their terms of use," she said. "Such hateful speech against women and graphic descriptions of violence are not jokes that would be acceptable in the pub.

"Those who post in this way are certainly mostly teenage boys and young men saying inappropriate things, but we do believe that these sites have attracted sexual predators too. It is a dangerous group with some dangerous users."

She believes that Facebook would have removed the site if the same jokes or threats were aimed at ethnic minority groups rather than women. And its ban on nude photographs means that pictures of mothers breastfeeding are now allowed. "It is shameless double standards," she said.

Activists who have gone online to make their case, and to publish images for a campaign promoting consensual rather than forced sexual activity, have been subjected to such a violent response that some have complained to the police.

Campaigners on both sides of the Atlantic have now switched their attention to businesses as they believe Facebook is inclined to allow the pages to continue because of the viewers and hence advertising revenue they bring in.

"Facebook will only listen to money, so we are now targeting the advertisers who have appeared on their pages," said Miss Osmond. "We are delighted with the response of companies like John Lewis that pulled their ads."

Major companies that advertise on Facebook were furious to discover that their advertisements were appearing on the "rape page" and demanded they be removed. They included Barclays, 02, John Lewis, Sony, BlackBerry, American Express, Groupon, Heinz, National Lottery, the White Company and PepsiCo.

After complaints from several businesses to Facebook, the "alleyway" page was "whitelisted" last week, meaning that no adverts could be rotated on it. But advertisements continue to appear on other pages where the content was just as offensive.

"Facebook will only listen to money so we are now targeting the advertisers who have appeared on their pages," said Miss Osmond. "We are delighted with the response of companies that have pulled their ads." RINJ is making similar headway with North American advertisers.

A spokesman for John Lewis, one of the first companies to withdraw its adverts from the "alleyway" page said yesterday that it was not aware its advertising was still appearing on other offensive pages.

"Unfortunately, we cannot control what pages people are viewing on Facebook," he said. "We do not choose the page where our advertisements appear but we blacklist a number of content types.

"However, we take the issue of inappropriate content very seriously As soon as we become aware of any advertisement on a page that is not right for our customers we will have it removed."

The controversy highlights a dark side of the burgeoning world of social networking. Some media commentators said the "rape pages" were the latest example of the dangers of unfettered anonymity on social media websites.

Dr Aric Sigman, the author of Remotely Controlled and several papers on social media, said Facebook and other websites allowed contributors to post comments with no accountability.

"It makes the abnormal normal," he said. "It creates an artificial world in which people can say things without the normal checks and balances, from adults and peer groups, that would be applied in real life.

"If you said some of those things in a pub, somebody would say you've had too much drink or you're out of line. But on the internet it can appear to be normal when other join in anonymously and reinforce those views."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/8829165/Cyber-anarchists-blamed-for-unleashing-a-series-of-Facebook-rape-pages.html

2 Replies

@firefly,

Unusually Facebook to this point has protected the right to speak and the right to humor. I dont expect it to last.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Yes this is surely a danger to women and will cause a large percent of young men who come across it to turn from rapists in waiting(all men are at best just rapists in waiting) to the real full blown thing.

If such pages was not put up by idiot teenage boys looking to get a reaction out of the old folks the feminists would had needed to created the pages themselves.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

This crowd reminds me of the church ninnies who used to go around giving lectures on the evilness of dancing and of the wrong kind of music....they are the most soul sucking humorless humans around, and are best ignored.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

The more of a reaction such silliness get on the net the more of it there will be view.

Ban or try to ban a book, a movie or an internet webpage the more the book will be read, the movie watch and the internet webpage view.

I remember when a magazine by the name of Rampart had an anti Vietnam cover picture of poor young girl running down the road on fire from napalm and the school library pull it off the shelf.

A numbers of us went out of our ways to purchase a copy and show what the school system had removed from the library.

Of course Firefly and others like her love to have this example of evil young men, in my opinion, and had no real desire to have them removed anytime soon.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Hawkeye come to think of it fighting such "rape pages" is likely to be one hell of a driver for donations.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Hawkeye come to think of it fighting such "rape pages" is likely to be one hell of a driver for donations.

Given that sexual transgression and confusion are largely an affliction of the young, and that the current population of youth have for all their lives been confronted with mass adult dishonesty and over-reaction towards threats of harm, I gotta think that this" OMG, YOU CANT DO THAT!" reaction to rape humor is taken with more than a grain of salt.

Hopefully

0 Replies

Does anyone had any current information of the Canadian rave "gang rape" story.

The last information I could find date back to Jan. of this year was that two are facing child porn charges for taking and or spreading the video of this 'rape' and one 18 years old was being charge with taking part in this 'rape'.

Strange how for the last 10 months this story had seem to had disappear from view.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Did you find the info while searching for copies of the video on the internet???

Anyhow......Trial dates have been set for the only man charged in connection with the sexual assault of teenage girl at a Pitt Meadows rave last year.

The trial for Colton Ashton McMorris is scheduled to last three weeks, beginning Feb. 21, 2012 in Port Coquitlam Provincial Court.

McMorris, 18, faces one count of sexual assault.

The other adult charged, Dennis John Allen Warrington, will be tried separately. Warrington, 19, is charged with making child pornography, and intending to distribute it.

source <bclocalnews.com>

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

Going to be an interesting trial especial in light of the fact that a large percents of the people who had seem the video or were even witnesses at the time seems to feel that the actions was not rape but consensus sex.

Of course maybe the state is going to try to keep the jury from seeing this video as after all it is child porn.

Oh, it is also interesting that with at least three witnesses that are working with the government and a video only one person had been charge with this gang rape to date.

I did enjoyed the dig about my perhaps searching to download this video by the way. How cute of you.

0 Replies

Quote:

Herman Cain emphatically denied on Monday that he had ever sexually harassed anyone, calling allegations of harassment by two former employees “totally baseless and totally false” and saying that he is the innocent victim of a “witch hunt.”

With the allegations threatening his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, Cain acknowledged in an interview with Fox News Channel the harassment charges during his tenure as head of the National Restaurant Association. He said he had been “falsely accused.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/herman-cain-declined-to-address-allegations-that-he-sexually-harassed-two-former-female-employees/2011/10/31/gIQAQ8KNZM_story.html?hpid=z1

I see that his political foes have finally gone nuclear....if you want to get somebody in America today the fastest best way to do it is to claim that they abuse women.

1 Reply

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know