Should able2know ban people for having untoward opinions?

@firefly,

But what does consensual mean ff? That's where the real argument is. What on earth are state laws to do with it? Is docile compliance out of some necessity, imposed from outside without which it wouldn't happen, not rape?

It depends how the word is being used. And on giving a special status to certain muscles which cannot be justified scientifically.

1 Reply

@spendius,

State laws in the U.S. define "consent", Spendi.

In the state in which Hawkeye lives, this is the definition of "consent".

Quote:

"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.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.44

Freely willing agreement, means freely willing--without undue coercion or force or substantial threat.

Or, the victim can express specific non consent...

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, or Where there is threat of substantial unlawful harm to property rights of the victim.

And the state spells out instances where the victim might be legally unable to consent--for instance:

Quote:

When the victim is incapable of consent by reason of being physically helpless or mentally incapacitated...or is a person with a developental disability

It really isn't difficult to understand. There are three degrees of rape--reflecting the seriousness of the circumstances the crime. All of them define "Rape" as non consensual sexual intercourse.

Quote:

Is docile compliance out of some necessity, imposed from outside without which it wouldn't happen, not rape?

Yes, that probably would be rape under that state law if it meant that the victim wasn't "freely willing"--that she was influenced by substantial threat, or force, or coercion. Docile compliance and submission are not "consent"--for consent, you need agreement.

2 Replies

There was an asshole here who repeatedly supported the right of paedophiles to view child pornography, stating that the children were not further hurt by the images being viewed. I complained several times. As far as I know, he was never banned. As far as I'm concerned, if someone can get away with crap like that, and not be banned, then any suspension is complete hypocrisy motivated by the personal views of the moderators. This used to be a good site. Now it's just complete garbage. Just another example of the plethora of digital trash floating around the ether.

3 Replies

@HexHammer,

Hex wrote:

There'll be no customers at the market, if the food is rotten.

Hex,

I view the posts of the person in question as being more like briny water or sour milk than rancid meat. The sourness of the milk will drive away the people with weaker stomachs, and only the "tough customers" will be left over. Toughness usually goes hand-in-hand with self-confidence, which in turn correlates positively with age and intelligence. So the posters who are able to put up with his rottenness will tend to be the smarter, older and wiser ones. That's a good thing for the level of debate, isn't it?

Oylok

(And as Cycloptichorn said at the beginning of the thread, IGNORE works wonders for people with weak stomachs.)

1 Reply

@Wilso,

Wilso wrote:

This used to be a good site. Now it's just complete garbage.

You think it's garbage compared to what it was? I'm new, so I can't compare, but some of posts are wonderful. Every twentieth post or so teaches me something new.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

In the state in which Hawkeye lives, this is the definition of "consent".
Quote:

"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.

But that's circular ff. I'll ask what does "freely given" mean. Consensual has been defined as consensual which is a synonym for freely given.

It's the same with "coercion". Legalities are not what some feminists are talking about. They see men's laws.

1 Reply

@Oylok,

Oylok wrote:

Hex wrote:
There'll be no customers at the market, if the food is rotten.

Hex,

I view the posts of the person in question as being more like briny water or sour milk than rancid meat. The sourness of the milk will drive away the people with weaker stomachs, and only the "tough customers" will be left over. Toughness usually goes hand-in-hand with self-confidence, which in turn correlates positively with age and intelligence. So the posters who are able to put up with his rottenness will tend to be the smarter, older and wiser ones. That's a good thing for the level of debate, isn't it?

Oylok

(And as Cycloptichorn said at the beginning of the thread, IGNORE works wonders for people with weak stomachs.)

Thing is, as of late there has been a massive loss of people, most of the goes years back. We need change ..fast.

1 Reply

@Wilso,

Wilso wrote:

There was an asshole here who repeatedly supported the right of paedophiles to view child pornography, stating that the children were not further hurt by the images being viewed. I complained several times. As far as I know, he was never banned. As far as I'm concerned, if someone can get away with crap like that, and not be banned, then any suspension is complete hypocrisy motivated by the personal views of the moderators. This used to be a good site. Now it's just complete garbage. Just another example of the plethora of digital trash floating around the ether.

I would say he's both right and wrong per se. What he doesn't take into consideration in the side effects of masses viewing such pictures, there will always be people taking it a step further, and not just stay with the pictures.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
In the state in which Hawkeye lives, this is the definition of "consent".
Quote:

"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.

But that's circular ff. I'll ask what does "freely given" mean. Consensual has been defined as consensual which is a synonym for freely given.

It's the same with "coercion". Legalities are not what some feminists are talking about. They see men's laws.

For ****'s sake spendi. Has your brain become so addled by those pints that you can't even understand simple English any more. Jesus christ, what else are you taking. Your capacity to blather on with meaningless garbage seems to have continued to grow with each post. You're a bloody fruitcake.

2 Replies

@Wilso,

Come on old chap. Fruitcakes are delicious. Especially if they are soaked in sherry overnight and served up medium warm in large portions with runny custard by a properly constituted wench whose sole object in life is to please the bloke who knocks himself out to provide her with home comforts.

0 Replies

@Wilso,

Quote:

For ****'s sake spendi. Has your brain become so addled by those pints that you can't even understand simple English any more. Jesus christ, what else are you taking. Your capacity to blather on with meaningless garbage seems to have continued to grow with each post. You're a bloody fruitcake.

I think your post could have done with less facts and more opinion.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

He's okay Io. He's just a bit pissed with property distribution and I'm not unsympathetic.

0 Replies

@Wilso,

Wilso wrote:

There was an asshole here who repeatedly supported the right of paedophiles to view child pornography, stating that the children were not further hurt by the images being viewed. I complained several times. As far as I know, he was never banned. As far as I'm concerned, if someone can get away with crap like that, and not be banned, then any suspension is complete hypocrisy motivated by the personal views of the moderators. This used to be a good site. Now it's just complete garbage. Just another example of the plethora of digital trash floating around the ether.

You are, of course, referring to Hawkeye10.

2 Replies

@Intrepid,

Quote:

You are, of course, referring to Hawkeye10.

Not necessarily, I think he is speaking of AGROTE (not sure if I am spelling this correctly,as he has been gone a long while, memory fails)

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

We could ban all pornography. What good does it do anyway ? Compare that to the harm.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
You are, of course, referring to Hawkeye10.
Not necessarily, I think he is speaking of AGROTE (not sure if I am spelling this correctly,as he has been gone a long while, memory fails)

Do you deny that you have exactly the same view?

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

Quote:

Do you deny that you have exactly the same view?

Yes, as I remember Agrote made it clear that he was speaking of child porn as being depictions of children during sex acts, something that I have always said should be banned and punished. When I speak of legalizing child porn I am mostly talking about pics of nakid kids, erotic or not, which I think should be legal. Keep in mind that I am not advocating violating the law, I am advocating changing the law.

EDIT: in my opinion Baning either Agrote or I for our beliefs and opinions would be an abomination....if our ideas and opinions are so bad then it should be easy to successfully argue that they should be ignored and shunned. I think that all of these calls to ban are from people who know that they dont have a goods goods to do this, because the ideas and opinions that appall them are too solid to be dispensed with in the normal manor, and so they try to cheat by getting the boss to do the dirty work. I believe in the market place of ideas...either show that your ideas have more value than do the ones you hate, or shut up.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

State laws in the U.S. define "consent", Spendi.

In the state in which Hawkeye lives, this is the definition of "consent".

However Firefly by your postings you wish to go far far beyond the meaning of the laws to cover women who by their own damn free actions had gotten high with their dates and if they happen to regret their own behaviors after the fact get their sexual and drinking/drug partners lock up.

Or your wish to declare any pressure on a woman to have sex that had nothing to do with force or threat of force should be declare a rape.

0 Replies

Hawkeye has, in fact, encouraged others to violate rape laws.

Hawkeye said:

Quote:

I have both raped and been raped, and so far as I recall I have tended to enjoy the experience immensely. I recommend the experience, no matter what the law says. http://able2know.org/topic/162398-2#post-4378052

Regarding committing rape you said, "I recommend the experience, no matter what the law says"--That is encouraging others to violate rape laws, to commit the crime of rape.

2 Replies

@HexHammer,

HexHammer wrote:

Thing is, as of late there has been a massive loss of people

really?

the numbers (when last presented) suggest that the site continues to grow

1 Reply

Should able2know ban people for having untoward opinions?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know