9
   

Is the Head of the IMF a Sex Criminal?

 
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:17 pm
@hawkeye10,
All that you say is true and just backs my rejoinder to spendius.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:18 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

If her allegation that a man 30 years older then her and in bad shape could force oral sex on her without being harm is true it a damn miracle.

Walk into a co-ed health club/gym over lunch one day and watch the weight machines. Typical scene: a fit 20 something woman walks up and sets up 20 lbs on the machine, does a set of ten. An overweight, middle aged man walks up next and sets up 50 lbs, does a set of ten. Pick another machine, see the same story. These days many of us work at jobs that don't required a lot of raw physical strength so we don't see it in our everyday lives anymore, but the average 60 year old man can easily overpower the average thirty year old woman. If you don't believe that, visit that health club.
panzade
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:20 pm
@BillRM,
If her allegation that a man 30 years older then her and in bad shape could force oral sex on her without being harm is true it a damn miracle.

No it's not. You have no way of knowing what it's like to be sexually assaulted by someone stronger and heavier than you. You have no reference point.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:23 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
I doubt that anyone would argue that DNA evidence provides any insights into an alleged victim's state of mind, but then you were just setting that up as a strawman so I'm sure you don't care if it's true or not.
That is why the state leaked the DNA on the uniform evidence, because it does not matter, and ripped up the carpet to test the spot where Ophelia claims that she spit his sperm, because it does not matter. Never mind s that so far as we know DSK and Ophelia's account of the sex are the same. The adults in the room know that the state will go to the jury and say " we have proved with STATE OF THE ART DNA TESTING! that the sex happened as Ophelia said it did, and since she was telling the truth about that you should believe her about the consent as well".
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:26 pm
@hawkeye10,
Well then hawk--I'm a whack job. On moral grounds. Not legal ones.

As I said, the woman should make some sacrifice to prove her enthusiasm isn't faked because of pressure from any source. She should be addicted really.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:30 pm
@panzade,
You will have to read my posts more carefully pan.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:32 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

My theory based upon what I know of these two people is that Ophelia registered concern for her job but never refusal of sexual advance.

But you have made that up out of thin air. There is no account of this being the case, no statement from DSK that this is the case, no nothing. Why do you think she "registered concern for her job" when neither participant in the case has claimed that?

hawkeye10 wrote:
This is the kind of case were we can see clearly how profoundly the feminists are trying to change the playing field by changing the standard from what we can prove the guy did to how the woman claimes in court that she felt. Ophelia would have no trouble convincing 12 people that her head wanted "no", but proving that DSK knew where her head was and violated it is another matter.

So far, this has been the kind of case where a woman claims a very straightforward sexual assault. She's not claiming she was impaired and didn't know what she was doing. She is not claiming she was afraid to resist, she resisted and eventually escaped. She is not claiming that violence was threatened, she is claiming violence was used. It is one thing to say that feminists are trying to distort the meaning of consent, completely another to refuse to believe that violent sexual assault occurs. I can't fathom how you refuse to believe even in the idea that straightforward sexual assault is possible. What evidence do you think is necessary to prove rape? In the absence of witnesses, is it possible to prove it to your satisfaction?
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:38 pm
@engineer,
Quote:
Pick another machine, see the same story. These days many of us work at jobs that don't required a lot of raw physical strength so we don't see it in our everyday lives anymore, but the average 60 year old man can easily overpower the average thirty year old woman. If you don't believe that, visit that health club.


I do visit my gym and please take note that DSK does not look like a gym goer to say the least so we are not talking about a 62 years old man who work out. Take a look at him in the videos.

Now can I press more then most 30 something woman more then likely, could I therefore overpower a 30 something woman to gain oral sex with sheer force without the issue being up in the air not likely at all.

Oh I used to go to a sport type gym who young women members was into weight lifting and they did put me to shame more often then not.

Now I am a member of Bally and the women there do not shame me.

engineer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:45 pm
@BillRM,
I think you are being modest. My guess is that you can bench a lot more than the average woman at Bally. Add to that a weight and reach advantage and I think you could take the average thirty year old woman.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:49 pm
@engineer,
Quote:
Why do you think she "registered concern for her job" when neither participant in the case has claimed that?
She claims to have made this point to DSK, and many employees say that after that fact her job was her main concern. She might have made it all up, but based upon what we know of her I believe that she said something to that effect to DSK. It fits with a professional victim who will not take responsibility for her actions, she did not object to the sex directly, did not take a personal opinion on it, only registered concern that she was going to get into trouble with the employer. DSK knew that this would never happen, thus her only stated objection to the sex was not a problem, so she was in his mind willing to give him a blow job. I have no doubt that DSK will say that she gave him a blow job, that this was not a face **** event.
Quote:
What evidence do you think is necessary to prove rape? In the absence of witnesses, is it possible to prove it to your satisfaction?

Witnesses, physical injury, the alleged abuser having a history of abuse and the alleged victim not having a history as a victim, blood work that indicate that the alleged victim was likely passed out.....I have already long been on record that most of these sex cases, especially the ones that take place in ongoing intimate relationship, should not be a criminal matter. Most of what you want to prove as rape I dont want to be rape even if the facts are as alleged.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 04:50 pm
@engineer,
Quote:
My guess is that you can bench a lot more than the average woman at Bally


Yes at Bally you are correct at my old sport gym no way in hell and once more we are talking about a 62 years old who go the gym three or four times a week and cycle a few thousand miles a year not a 62 year old international banker who look far older and does not look like a gym user.

0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 05:00 pm
@Irishk,
I also don't think the case will go to trial. Or maybe I should say that it would mildly surprise me if it does.

I'll admit I hadn't allowed for DSK setting it up so he can beat Sarkosy in an "unprecedented landslide."

I don't see why I sounded hysterical unless you are not following my argument. Intrinsically, the incident is common place. But all the others can't be put to use. But if you prefer to think nothing significant is happening here that's your choice.

spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 05:03 pm
@engineer,
Quote:
If her allegation is true, that violence (not the threat of violence or her belief that he would get violent) was used to force her to perform a sex act, shouldn't that be illegal?


Your "If" renders the rest if your statement redundant. It can be reactivated if DSK admits to that. Not if he is just found guilty.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 05:09 pm
@hawkeye10,
I'm aware the position is heretical hawk. But I'm sticking to it nevertheless.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 05:17 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Oh--I don't know about that izzy. Not many books have an opening line as good as that. Burgess has a good one. Kigsley Amis buried his key line somewhere near the middle. I found one dead centre.

.


I would have thought that as a devotee of Augustan Satirism you would have realised the Victorian novel is a literary cul-de-sac. If you're looking for good opening lines you can't beat;

Queenie was a blonde, and her age stood still,
And she danced twice a day in vaudeville.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 05:22 pm
@izzythepush,
I've never thought of Jane Austen as a Victorian. I don't think Rider Haggard is a literary cul-de-sac either.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 05:44 pm
@hawkeye10,
I'm glad you agree with me.
0 Replies
 
Irishk
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 05:54 pm
@spendius,
I've been following, somewhat. I don't agree with most of it. And, when you bring in bizarre references (i.e., Peyton Place?) etc. ...

Well, it's a bit like being drunk-dialed from another century.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 06:30 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
If her allegation is true, that violence (not the threat of violence or her belief that he would get violent) was used to force her to perform a sex act, shouldn't that be illegal?

Your "If" renders the rest if your statement redundant. It can be reactivated if DSK admits to that. Not if he is just found guilty.

So if most the evidence that Hawk asked for above (physical injury and signs of resistance, history of abusive sexual behavior, no evidence of "victimhood" by the alleged victim, etc.) is brought out in court and DSK is found guilty it means nothing unless he admits to it? By that standard our prisons are full of innocents.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 May, 2011 06:32 pm
@engineer,
If she made it very clear that she didnt want sex then it revolves around why she changed her mind and did . Was it fear of losing her job, the promise of money, the fear of physical assault....did it all hinge on she didnt like the taste when he came in her mouth ?

Was that the agreement that failed ? He would give her money and not cum in her mouth....He came in her mouth and she left without her money .

Hopefully the trial will be fair and if he is guilty he will be locked away for a long time . It never hurts to send a message to the rich and powerful .

Quote:
If .... violence (not the threat of violence or her belief that he would get violent) was used to force her to perform a sex act, shouldn't that be illegal?
Definitely...and throw away the key .
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.36 seconds on 11/15/2024 at 12:35:24