|
California debates 'yes means yes' sex assault law
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-10-03 14:36:40
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. How is it extreme then?
In a thread where rape is being discussed he asked if you would put your wife in skimpy clothing out in front of a bunch of horny soldiers.
Why would it make you stupid if you did?
Unless you're implying that they're going to do something to your wife?
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 14:36:51
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. Yes, who was responding to Maldini's example. Because that's pretty much spot on what Maldini was implying with his example. I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed?
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 14:37:35
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. How is it extreme then?
In a thread where rape is being discussed he asked if you would put your wife in skimpy clothing out in front of a bunch of horny soldiers.
Why would it make you stupid if you did?
Unless you're implying that they're going to do something to your wife? You were the one implying things, not me.
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 303
By Quetzalcoatl.Maldini 2014-10-03 14:38:41
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling.
Its not a troll. I just want you to demonstrate you have some common sense.
You've demonstrated you're smart enough to understand the difference between people saying "she should be sensible" from the people who keep straw manning with the pathetic sarcastic response of "right she was asking to be raped when she got dressed up".
That example too extreme for you?
Ok - Woman dressed up and went out to certain night club and got raped. Do you or do you not tell your daughter to go out to the same club and dress the same way?
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 14:40:33
Maldini, I just wanted you to know, I wasn't calling you a troll. I was calling Flavin one for his extreme example and response to your hypothetical.
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 303
By Quetzalcoatl.Maldini 2014-10-03 14:42:03
Maldini, I just wanted you to know, I wasn't calling you a troll. I was calling Flavin one for his extreme example and response to your hypothetical.
i want him to demonstrate eloquently in front of us all that he would send his daughter/wife out knowing he put them in some sort of potential harm to justify his stance.
In his book it seems more important to have an eloquent outlook than to make sense.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-10-03 14:42:54
Sleeping with a married woman does not give someone the right to burn your house down. You are correct.
It shouldn't even get you punched. If you knew that the woman was married and yet, you still slept with her, you deserve a lot worse punishment than being punched.
A total *** kicking, sure. Why?
There's obvisouly issues that they're having with their marriage and they should spend the time working on those problems or just give up on it.
There's no reason to go and beat some guys *** because you're angry about your wife stepping out on you lol...
Well, there IS a reason to, just not a very good one.
I've never understood it either, I would think that the person you should be angry at is your wife. She is supposed to have some concept of the marriage shes risking.
The guy on the other end has no clue what your marriage is made of. I don't see it as a reason. Usually happy people don't step out on their spouses. There's already something wrong with it anyways.
The outside person doesn't care about your marriage and they're under no obligation to.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-10-03 14:45:06
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Well the fact that Soldiers rape their own military comrades should answer that for you.
Are you guys really this naive? Maldini, I just wanted you to know, I wasn't calling you a troll. I was calling Flavin one for his extreme example and response to your hypothetical. It was what he was implying as he more clearly stated her for ya.
If they'll rape their own they'll rape your wife.
Another swing and a miss from King.
Bahamut.Milamber
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3692
By Bahamut.Milamber 2014-10-03 14:45:24
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. Yes, who was responding to Maldini's example. Because that's pretty much spot on what Maldini was implying with his example. I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed? You seem to be saying that Flavin took an example to the extreme. Flavin was responding to Maldini's post, which was not taking an example to the extreme, but responding to an extreme example.
The intent of Maldini's post can be correlated by his subsequent post, confirming that he was intending to portray soldiers as military male rape-bots(paraphrasing mine).
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Well the fact that Soldiers rape their own military comrades should answer that for you.
Are you guys really this naive? I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed? You seem to miss that it was Maldini that was making an extreme example, not Flavin. Implying Flavin is a troll for pointing out the corollaries to Maldini's exposition is incorrect. However, taking your statement and placing it against Maldini's would be accurate.
Hopefully that clarifies things.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2014-10-03 14:45:43
There's many kind of rapists/murderers out there and the truth of it is yes to some dressing a certain way, behaving a certain way, or being in a certain place is more likely to increase your risk of being a victim.
But there are scenarios where any of those don't make a ***.
Prostitutes are a known high risk, but for several factors and not just the way they're dressed, but if you're wearing the *** suit, somebody will mistake you for a ***. It's at that point that you only have yourself to be mad at when somebody thinks of you as an object, but it's still the offenders fault for violating them.
Is somebody dressed in sweats and a hoodie less likely to get assaulted than a chick in a *** suit? pretty sure statistically yes, but impossible? certainly not. But that's just raw analysis.
It's still *** up to say to somebody and their family though.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 14:45:54
Another swing and a miss from King. Wait, I'm playing baseball in your mind?
No wonder you are so deluded.
[+]
By Blazed1979 2014-10-03 14:46:51
Milibar's response will be something along the lines of
"they're not one and the same"
or
"Its about who is responsible for who's actions"
or
"there are risks in everything we do"
or
"Are you implying that men are all rapists"
or
"Rape is not always associated with sex" - might be true, but this specific type of rape under the conditions being discussed in this forum, yes- the rape is of a sexual nature and motive.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 14:47:58
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. Yes, who was responding to Maldini's example. Because that's pretty much spot on what Maldini was implying with his example. I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed? You seem to be saying that Flavin took an example to the extreme. Flavin was responding to Maldini's post, which was not taking an example to the extreme, but responding to an extreme example.
The intent of Maldini's post can be correlated by his subsequent post, confirming that he was intending to portray soldiers as military male rape-bots(paraphrasing mine).
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Well the fact that Soldiers rape their own military comrades should answer that for you.
Are you guys really this naive? I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed? You seem to miss that it was Maldini that was making an extreme example, not Flavin. Implying Flavin is a troll for pointing out the corollaries to Maldini's exposition is incorrect. However, taking your statement and placing it against Maldini's would be accurate.
Hopefully that clarifies things. It did.
I didn't respond to Maldini's extreme example because, well, I was hoping that somebody else would correct it.
Flavin, on the other hand, took it and made it more extreme. And this isn't the first time he has done that either.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-10-03 14:48:15
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. How is it extreme then?
In a thread where rape is being discussed he asked if you would put your wife in skimpy clothing out in front of a bunch of horny soldiers.
Why would it make you stupid if you did?
Unless you're implying that they're going to do something to your wife? You were the one implying things, not me. I didn't say you implied anything. I stated that Maldini did which you seem to be too dense to comprehend.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-10-03 14:49:03
Another swing and a miss from King. Wait, I'm playing baseball in your mind?
No wonder you are so deluded. That's the best you got?
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 303
By Quetzalcoatl.Maldini 2014-10-03 14:49:23
I'm innocent she said YES!!!
I SWEAR!
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 14:51:14
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. How is it extreme then?
In a thread where rape is being discussed he asked if you would put your wife in skimpy clothing out in front of a bunch of horny soldiers.
Why would it make you stupid if you did?
Unless you're implying that they're going to do something to your wife? You were the one implying things, not me. I didn't say you implied anything. I stated that Maldini did which you seem to be too dense to comprehend. Hmmm, should I use your own phrase? Another swing and a miss from Flavin.
Seriously though, you used an example that implies that men are inherently rapists when it comes to how a woman looks. It's even in your example.
I am not responding to Maldini's post, because that is not an argument I wish to go into.
By Nazrious 2014-10-03 14:51:49
Whole lot of failed humans....
Bars and clubs are not the place to go to find anything worthwhile, especially sex and even more so a spouse.
Lot of trash little boys thinking being a man involves some real stupid stuff.
There are proper ways to treat wome, today's youth of almost passed out vomitted one nighters is not it, nor is it the femdom fantasy of being treated like a princess while getting all the perks of being a Man.
None of this however has anything to do with how fail this law is.
It doesn't even help Victims and provides another tool for a lawyer to use to scare a victim even more.
Ragnarok.Nausi
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2014-10-03 14:53:33
Whole lot of failed humans....
Bars and clubs are not the place to go to find anything worthwhile, especially sex and even more so a spouse.
Lot of trash little boys thinking being a man involves some real stupid stuff.
There are proper ways to treat wome, today's youth of almost passed out vomitted one nighters is not it, nor is it the femdom fantasy of being treated like a princess while getting all the perks of being a Man.
None of this however has anything to do with how fail this law is.
It doesn't even help Victims and provides another tool for a lawyer to use to scare a victim even more. Who said I found my random drunk *** at bars?
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 14:55:05
Whole lot of failed humans....
Bars and clubs are not the place to go to find anything worthwhile, especially sex and even more so a spouse.
Lot of trash little boys thinking being a man involves some real stupid stuff.
There are proper ways to treat wome, today's youth of almost passed out vomitted one nighters is not it, nor is it the femdom fantasy of being treated like a princess while getting all the perks of being a Man.
None of this however has anything to do with how fail this law is.
It doesn't even help Victims and provides another tool for a lawyer to use to scare a victim even more. Who said I found my random drunk *** at bars? I don't know about you, but my random drunk one-nighters are found in clubs.
By Nazrious 2014-10-03 14:55:13
Whole lot of failed humans....
Bars and clubs are not the place to go to find anything worthwhile, especially sex and even more so a spouse.
Lot of trash little boys thinking being a man involves some real stupid stuff.
There are proper ways to treat wome, today's youth of almost passed out vomitted one nighters is not it, nor is it the femdom fantasy of being treated like a princess while getting all the perks of being a Man.
None of this however has anything to do with how fail this law is.
It doesn't even help Victims and provides another tool for a lawyer to use to scare a victim even more. Who said I found my random drunk *** at bars?
/facepalm
By Jetackuu 2014-10-03 14:57:00
Whole lot of failed humans....
Bars and clubs are not the place to go to find anything worthwhile, especially sex and even more so a spouse.
Lot of trash little boys thinking being a man involves some real stupid stuff.
There are proper ways to treat wome, today's youth of almost passed out vomitted one nighters is not it, nor is it the femdom fantasy of being treated like a princess while getting all the perks of being a Man.
None of this however has anything to do with how fail this law is.
It doesn't even help Victims and provides another tool for a lawyer to use to scare a victim even more.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 14:58:43
It doesn't even help Victims and provides another tool for a lawyer to use to scare a victim even more. Just asking, but do you think this creates an opportunity for additional false claims to be made?
Bahamut.Kara
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2014-10-03 15:00:49
The past page in a half has had a discussion dealing with a text clarification issue.
In a thread bemoaning a law requiring clarifying language rather than body language or silence to be used as consent.
Ironic.
Bahamut.Milamber
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3692
By Bahamut.Milamber 2014-10-03 15:09:02
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. Yes, who was responding to Maldini's example. Because that's pretty much spot on what Maldini was implying with his example. I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed? You seem to be saying that Flavin took an example to the extreme. Flavin was responding to Maldini's post, which was not taking an example to the extreme, but responding to an extreme example.
The intent of Maldini's post can be correlated by his subsequent post, confirming that he was intending to portray soldiers as military male rape-bots(paraphrasing mine).
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Well the fact that Soldiers rape their own military comrades should answer that for you.
Are you guys really this naive? I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed? You seem to miss that it was Maldini that was making an extreme example, not Flavin. Implying Flavin is a troll for pointing out the corollaries to Maldini's exposition is incorrect. However, taking your statement and placing it against Maldini's would be accurate.
Hopefully that clarifies things. It did.
I didn't respond to Maldini's extreme example because, well, I was hoping that somebody else would correct it.
Flavin, on the other hand, took it and made it more extreme. And this isn't the first time he has done that either. How, exactly, did he make it more extreme?
He pretty must just asked Maldini to clarify whether it was the "soldier" part or the "male" part of "male soldier" (not explicitly stated, but implied) which makes them "go all rapey".
That last quote, by the way, I would be happy never to have to type again for the rest of my life.
[+]
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-10-03 15:09:58
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Maldini, I just wanted you to know, I wasn't calling you a troll. I was calling Flavin one for his extreme example and response to your hypothetical.
i want him to demonstrate eloquently in front of us all that he would send his daughter/wife out knowing he put them in some sort of potential harm to justify his stance.
In his book it seems more important to have an eloquent outlook than to make sense. Listen. No where in any of my posts or any one's posts here on this board advocates sending anyone into a dangerous situation. No one. No one is saying hey baby I know this corner where girls get raped on the daily but the music is just so great so you should go there anyways. No one is saying that you shouldn't use caution when going about your life. Reality can be harsh yes and there are steps you can take to mitigate it.
Now hopefully we have that cleared up.
What I do take issue with is this idea that no matter what we do no matter what steps we take you'll still hold a victim responsible. You could take every precaution possible and bad things still happen anyways. This idea that people should dress a certain way or act a certain way otherwise they're just asking to be made a victim is ridiculous.
Would I send my hypothetical daughter out to a club where some other woman got raped the night before? No.
If she went anyways without my permission and was raped would I tell her it was her fault? No. Would I even insinuate that she had anything to do with it? No. Would I tell her that because her skirt was too short she was asking for it? No. Would you?
You guys seem to think that we don't understand what risk mitigation is. You'd be wrong.
You're idea of how to attack the problem though is to attack the victim. You should be doing this, you shouldn't be doing that! don't drink like a *** or dress like a *** and you won't get raped. It's funny cause most of you don't want anyone telling you how to live your life but don't mind telling others how to do it. Live your life in fear because someone is out to get you and if they do its your fault.
I just disagree with the way you look at the world.
[+]
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-03 15:11:51
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. Yes, who was responding to Maldini's example. Because that's pretty much spot on what Maldini was implying with his example. I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed? You seem to be saying that Flavin took an example to the extreme. Flavin was responding to Maldini's post, which was not taking an example to the extreme, but responding to an extreme example.
The intent of Maldini's post can be correlated by his subsequent post, confirming that he was intending to portray soldiers as military male rape-bots(paraphrasing mine).
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Well the fact that Soldiers rape their own military comrades should answer that for you.
Are you guys really this naive? I'm confused, are you agreeing with me or are you trying to point out something I missed? You seem to miss that it was Maldini that was making an extreme example, not Flavin. Implying Flavin is a troll for pointing out the corollaries to Maldini's exposition is incorrect. However, taking your statement and placing it against Maldini's would be accurate.
Hopefully that clarifies things. It did.
I didn't respond to Maldini's extreme example because, well, I was hoping that somebody else would correct it.
Flavin, on the other hand, took it and made it more extreme. And this isn't the first time he has done that either. How, exactly, did he make it more extreme?
He pretty must just asked Maldini to clarify whether it was the "soldier" part or the "male" part of "male soldier" (not explicitly stated, but implied) which makes them "go all rapey".
That last quote, by the way, I would be happy never to have to type again for the rest of my life. Maldini was implying that putting one's wife in a slutty outfit and placing them in a room full of male soldiers is asking for rape.
Flavin took that and implied that it's not just soldiers, but all men are like that.
Mind you, these were indirect implications, and open for interpretation. That's how I read their posts. If you didn't read it like that, then that's because our perceptions are different.
But I don't want to go further into that argument, as they are both idiots.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-10-03 15:13:22
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »It was his fault he got accused of rape, he shouldn't have had consensual sex with that girl. She had a boyfriend, you know he was looking for trouble.
Between us, one of us has had a house burned down because a friend slept with a girl who was romantically entangled otherwise, and he knew it.
I don't blame anyone but the arsonist.
But it could have been avoided if said friend found somewhere else to whet his willy. BLAMING THE VICTIM!!!!
No excuses! Your friend didn't ask for it one bit! You can't seriously believe that these two scenarios are equivalent:
- saying that someone wearing provocative clothes, picking up soap, or being in a bad part of town, is just asking to be raped, and it's their fault
- arson due to infidelity
Hypothetical to call you on your BS - would you put your wife dressed in a mini skirt, cleavage busting out and whatnot, in front of a bunch of horny soldiers on a military base who haven't seen a woman in years?
You're what I like to call a "Smart Idiot" if you do.Are you saying that soldiers are unable to control themselves if they see a woman and they will go all rapey if they see one dressed in a miniskirt and a shirt showing cleavage?
Are you saying that we should not trust soldiers? Or is it that all men are basically rapists if a sexy woman is put in front of us?
Is self-control such a difficult concept? Wow, talk about taking an example to the extreme.
Sometimes I think your responses are just trolling. I was referring to Flavin, not Maldini. How is it extreme then?
In a thread where rape is being discussed he asked if you would put your wife in skimpy clothing out in front of a bunch of horny soldiers.
Why would it make you stupid if you did?
Unless you're implying that they're going to do something to your wife? You were the one implying things, not me. I didn't say you implied anything. I stated that Maldini did which you seem to be too dense to comprehend. Hmmm, should I use your own phrase? Another swing and a miss from Flavin.
Seriously though, you used an example that implies that men are inherently rapists when it comes to how a woman looks. It's even in your example.
I am not responding to Maldini's post, because that is not an argument I wish to go into. My post didn't imply that. It wasn't a statement as there is a question mark at the end of the sentance. That makes it a question, you know me asking Maldini if that's what he actually thinks.
He made a statement, I replied and now because you can't read or understand the english language... here we are...
Bahamut.Milamber
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3692
By Bahamut.Milamber 2014-10-03 15:14:40
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Maldini, I just wanted you to know, I wasn't calling you a troll. I was calling Flavin one for his extreme example and response to your hypothetical.
i want him to demonstrate eloquently in front of us all that he would send his daughter/wife out knowing he put them in some sort of potential harm to justify his stance.
In his book it seems more important to have an eloquent outlook than to make sense. Listen. No where in any of my posts or any one's posts here on this board advocates sending anyone into a dangerous situation. No one. No one is saying hey baby I know this corner where girls get raped on the daily but the music is just so great so you should go there anyways. No one is saying that you shouldn't use caution when going about your life. Reality can be harsh yes and there are steps you can take to mitigate it.
Now hopefully we have that cleared up.
What I do take issue with is this idea that no matter what we do no matter what steps we take you'll still hold a victim responsible. You could take every precaution possible and bad things still happen anyways. This idea that people should dress a certain way or act a certain way otherwise they're just asking to be made a victim is ridiculous.
Would I send my hypothetical daughter out to a club where some other woman got raped the night before? No.
If she went anyways without my permission and was raped would I tell her it was her fault? No. Would I even insinuate that she had anything to do with it? No. Would I tell her that because her skirt was too short she was asking for it? No. Would you?
You guys seem to think that we don't understand what risk mitigation is. You'd be wrong.
You're idea of how to attack the problem though is to attack the victim. You should be doing this, you shouldn't be doing that! don't drink like a *** or dress like a *** and you won't get raped. It's funny cause most of you don't want anyone telling you how to live your life but don't mind telling others how to do it. Live your life in fear because someone is out to get you and if they do its your fault.
I just disagree with the way you look at the world. Flavin, sometimes you make me glad I didn't block you during your "..." phase.
This is one of those times.
[+]
By Ramyrez 2014-10-03 15:15:52
Quetzalcoatl.Maldini said: »Maldini, I just wanted you to know, I wasn't calling you a troll. I was calling Flavin one for his extreme example and response to your hypothetical.
i want him to demonstrate eloquently in front of us all that he would send his daughter/wife out knowing he put them in some sort of potential harm to justify his stance.
In his book it seems more important to have an eloquent outlook than to make sense. Listen. No where in any of my posts or any one's posts here on this board advocates sending anyone into a dangerous situation. No one. No one is saying hey baby I know this corner where girls get raped on the daily but the music is just so great so you should go there anyways. No one is saying that you shouldn't use caution when going about your life. Reality can be harsh yes and there are steps you can take to mitigate it.
Now hopefully we have that cleared up.
What I do take issue with is this idea that no matter what we do no matter what steps we take you'll still hold a victim responsible. You could take every precaution possible and bad things still happen anyways. This idea that people should dress a certain way or act a certain way otherwise they're just asking to be made a victim is ridiculous.
Would I send my hypothetical daughter out to a club where some other woman got raped the night before? No.
If she went anyways without my permission and was raped would I tell her it was her fault? No. Would I even insinuate that she had anything to do with it? No. Would I tell her that because her skirt was too short she was asking for it? No. Would you?
You guys seem to think that we don't understand what risk mitigation is. You'd be wrong.
You're idea of how to attack the problem though is to attack the victim. You should be doing this, you shouldn't be doing that! don't drink like a *** or dress like a *** and you won't get raped. It's funny cause most of you don't want anyone telling you how to live your life but don't mind telling others how to do it. Live your life in fear because someone is out to get you and if they do its your fault.
I just disagree with the way you look at the world. Flavin, sometimes you make me glad I didn't block you during your "..." phase.
This is one of those times.
He still likes to zing me now and then but I'm generally glad I never blocked him as well.
Admittedly it helps I'm working on just letting the religious talk go.
Though he did compare me to his grandmother just a few posts ago...
[+]
Quote: SAN DIEGO (AP) — College students have heard a similar refrain for years in campaigns to stop sexual assault: No means no.
Now, as universities around the country that are facing pressure over the handling of rape allegations adopt policies to define consensual sex, California is poised to take it a step further. Lawmakers are considering what would be the first-in-the-nation measure requiring all colleges that receive public funds to set a standard for when "yes means yes."
Defining consensual sex is a growing trend by universities in an effort to do more to protect victims. From the University of California system to Yale, schools have been adopting standards to distinguish when consent was given for a sexual activity and when it was not.
Legislation passed by California's state Senate in May and coming before the Assembly this month would require all schools that receive public funds for student financial assistance to set a so-called "affirmative consent standard" that could be used in investigating and adjudicating sexual assault allegations. That would be defined as "an affirmative, unambiguous and conscious decision" by each party to engage in sexual activity.
Silence or lack of resistance does not constitute consent. The legislation says it's also not consent if the person is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep.
Lawmakers say consent can be nonverbal, and universities with similar policies have outlined examples as maybe a nod of the head or moving in closer to the person.
Several state legislatures, including Maryland, Texas and Connecticut, introduced bills in the past year to push colleges to do more after a White House task force reported that 1 in 5 female college students is a victim of sexual assault. The U.S. Education Department also took the unprecedented step of releasing the names of schools facing federal investigation for the way they handle sexual abuse allegations.
But no state legislation has gone as far as California's bill in requiring a consent standard.
Critics say the state is overstepping its bounds. The Los Angeles Times in an editorial after the bill passed the state Senate 27-4 wrote that it raises questions as to whether it is "reasonable" or "enforceable." The legislation is based on the White House task force's recommendations.
"It seems extremely difficult and extraordinarily intrusive to micromanage sex so closely as to tell young people what steps they must take in the privacy of their own dorm rooms," the newspaper said.
Some fear navigating the murky waters of consent spells trouble for universities.
"Frequently these cases involve two individuals, both of whom maybe were under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and it can be very tricky to ascertain whether consent was obtained," said Ada Meloy, general counsel of the American Council on Education, which represents college presidents.
She said schools need to guarantee a safe environment for students, while law enforcement is best suited for handling more serious sexual assault cases.
John F. Banzhaf III, a George Washington University's Law School professor, believes having university disciplinary panels interpret vague cues and body language will open the door for more lawsuits.
The legal definition of rape in most states means the perpetrator used force or the threat of force against the victim, but the California legislation could set the stage in which both parties could accuse each other of sexual assault, he said.
"This bill would very, very radically change the definition of rape," he said.
University of California at Berkeley student Meghan Warner, 20, said that's a good thing. She said she was sexually assaulted during her freshman year by two men at a fraternity but didn't report it because she believed "that unless it was a stranger at night with a weapon who attacked you when you were walking home, that it wasn't rape. It's just a crappy thing that happened." She now runs campus workshops to teach students what constitutes consent.
"Most students don't know what consent is," she said. "I've asked at the workshops how many people think if a girl is blacked out drunk that it's OK to have sex with her. The amount of people who raised their hands was just startling."
Defining consent may be easy to do on paper, said Laura Nguyen, a 21-year-old San Diego State University senior, but "we're talking about college students out at night and the reality is there's not just 'yes' or 'no.' There is a lot of in between. I really think it depends on the situation."
The legislation initially stated that "if there is confusion as to whether a person has consented or continues to consent to sexual activity, it is essential that the participants stop the activity until the confusion can be clearly resolved."
After some interpreted that as asking people to stop after each kiss to get a verbal agreement before going to the next level, the bill was amended to say consent must be "ongoing" and "can be revoked at any time."
"California needs to provide our students with education, resources, consistent policies and justice so that the system is not stacked against survivors," state Sen. Kevin de Leon, a Los Angeles Democrat, said in promoting the bill.
Supporters say investigators would have to determine whether consent had been given by both parties instead of focusing on whether the complainant resisted or said no.
Denice Labertew of the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault said the bill fosters a cultural change: "There's a lot of criticism around affirmative consent because it requires us to change the way we normally think about this."
Source
|
|