|
|
|
|
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 1:30:03 PM | Well valda, if you check back you'll see it was actually you that cast aspertions on not only my parenting, but also my views on ACTUAL rape and many other aspects of my character which is what I was then responding to like for like
Or doesnt it count if YOU do it?
As for my supposed alleged possible blah blah blah thingy, what you are looking for is this
Presentation of 10 Minute Rule
Bill: Rape (Consent)
House of Commons
16th July 2002
Speaker: Julia Drown MP
Labour MP for South Swindon
As I only have the PDF document of the actual outlining of the ammendment, a word document of parliamental interprative advisories and a proposed judicial directive but no links
But an excert from the imaginary bill you intimated I had made up is this
The Bill includes a non-exhaustive list of situations where free agreement
could not be made. Those include: where a person submits or is unable to
resist because of force or fear of force, or because of fear of serious harm to
themselves or another person; where a person was asleep, unconscious or
too affected by alcohol or drugs to give free agreement; where a person did
not understand the nature of the act; or, where agreement is expressed by a
third party, not the victim.
and this
"We are all brought up with prejudices around sex. To counter those
prejudices, the Bill also states that the judge on each and every rape case
where it is relevant must direct members of the jury that they cannot assume
that the complainant did freely agree just because they did not say anything,
because they did not physically resist, because they were not physically
injured or because on an earlier occasion they had consented to sex with the
accused or another person
Theres a more indepth white paper I have feretted away somewhere too if you still think I am making it up but are too worried to actually bother searching for it incase you actually find the thing tho lol | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 2:06:00 PM | Message 73
You may percieve that it IS perfectly acceptable for a man to expect sex when a woman has acted in a flirtaious manner. However I do not.
Thank you for trying to explain somthing you assumed I could not.
Your assumptions that on a sub conscious level every one will equate "expecting sex" as a euphanism for "violent attacks on women" is questionable.
Message 76
I asked the question as i am not most people on the thread and disagreed with your comment. | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 2:10:42 PM | This a subject that is close to the knuckle for me.. I was the victim of a rape.. and despite the bruises and scratches, the fact that I had a witness, (problem was she was deaf and didn;t hear me) he still got away with it, the Crown Prosecution, said that there wasn't enough evidence to take it to court.. I think he meant enough money! I am still struggling, 3 years later to come to terms with it, and he goes scot free!!!
 | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 2:31:05 PM |
Well valda, if you check back you'll see it was actually you that cast aspertions on not only my parenting, but also my views on ACTUAL rape and many other aspects of my character which is what I was then responding to like for like
Or doesnt it count if YOU do it?
It would count if what you claim is true, nowhere in any post on this thread have I cast aspersions on you or your character, ridiculing some of what you've written is not the same as saying that you are this or that or worse still saying you are strung out on drugs.
(I've replied this one time because I have something to write in respect of other poster's posts on the topic)
Msg 77
I still say a no is a no, and that's right up until the point - but sometimes, and far too regularly, you have to question the amount of suggestion that these modern young girls provide, and can see it would be easy to conclude as judges have recently that there was just a bit too much enticement involved.
If the accused can cite 'enticement' to commit a crime as a his defense and get off with being guilty as a result surely that would mean then that lesser crimes can be thrown out of court along the same lines. I suppose if someone is starving, has no money, sees a loaf of bread in a shop window just waiting to be taken and eaten, his crime of stealing is perfectly acceptable under the circumstances and obviously the shopkeeper's own fault his bread was stolen because he displayed his wares in his window. Or perhaps it could be argued that it is perfectly fine for a shop keeper to display his wares in the hopes of acquiring a buyer for them so the thief should be charged regardless of how hungry he was at the time of the theft ?
It's interesting how a woman's body is seen as a lesser commodity in this day and age by so many
Msg 80, let's hope your post stikes a balance on this thread and some posters get real. | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 2:35:53 PM | msg 79 I am more than happy for anyone to disagree with my opinion that it is perfectly acceptable for man to expect sex with a woman who has acted flirtatiously with him.
However, I have not made any comments about the subconscious on this (or any other) thread.
"Expecting sex" and "violent attacks on women" are two totally different statements, and neither can be described as a euphemism for the other.
Please do not refer to "your assumptions" - I haven't made any 'assumptions' with regard to these terms.
Of course you are not 'most people' on this thread, which is why I didn't state that anyone was.
I am perfectly happy to place anyone in the group marked 'we agree that there are circumstances when it is acceptable to rape a woman' if they wish me to!
msg 84 Your apology is fully accepted!! We all type the wrong figure from time to time. | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 2:42:31 PM | No mean No.. just the same as , leave me alone, means leave me alone.. what one man will percieve as being flirtatious, another will see it for what it is, friendliness or politeness.. it seems to me that we have come a long way down the line..
I am now afraid to be polite or friendly as it maight get looked at in the wrong way.. what the heck has gone wrong with society... or is that women have just made it all to easy, and these men just dont' expect a no!! | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 2:54:52 PM | Shelone i did not sate you did make any comments regarding subconsciousness, I replied to your post by stating your message number in my previous post.
Unfortunately, i was responding to message 72 aslo ,and accidentally typed post 73 which was my own post . How have you assumed i was referring to you, when what i wanted too reply to you was clearly stated.
Bette Noir. I admire the strength and courage it must have taken to disclose on the forum Hope the struggle gets easier | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 3:57:58 PM |
It would count if what you claim is true, nowhere in any post on this thread have I cast aspersions on you or your character, ridiculing some of what you've written is not the same as saying that you are this or that or worse still saying you are strung out on drugs.
I couldnt be bothered trolling back and doing cut/pastes coz its late
But re the parenting Msg 56, and re the character stuff it starts in post 59 as I recall
And youre welcome btw lol | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 4:06:56 PM | Fair enough OP, it doesn't surprise me that you are not prepared to back up your claims. I've read my posts again and I will reiterate here and now that ridicule does not equal making false claims against people.
Interesting little scenario here...you accusing me of something I am innocent of but insisting I am guilty even though you have no proof of that fact or are prepared to show the proof. You'll be the first person I would call upon to defend me in a court of law should the need arise.
Sleep well 
Edit:
vvv I'm remembering now why I decided to ignore future posts of yours; giving attention to the puerile and the unintentionally facetious gets you nowhere and just gives you a headache. | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 4:15:17 PM | So youre as incapable of clicking back one page to see something you actually typed yourself in the firstplace and most probably remember anyway as you were of finding a rape law ammendment bill then eh?
Chances are it wouldnt have actually took any more effort to find the ammendment as it did to insinuate I'd plucked it out of thin air lol
But not copying and pasting something forward one page when its there to be seen just by clicking on the page number 3 link hardly qualifies as not being prepared to back something up lol, telling you where it is IS backing it up petal
But as I'm still up
OP your agenda in posting this thread is becoming increasingly transparent, it is now clear to me that you are on a mission to promote the cause of 'Free Love'. Sex without the consequences of guilt or even men having the burden of being responsible for unplanned pregnancies possibly. Men should be afforded the get out clause of diminished responsibility when being accussed of rape i.e. "I was drunk and horny and thought she was too", "I was so incredibly turned on by the way she was provocatively dressed, she is the one to blame." ?
You see that isnt responding to my posts nor points I've raised really is it? Its a subjective rhetoric intimating a mindset, aim and indirectly a character which isnt either A) relevant to the actual topic anyway and B) isnt, as you claim in response to anything I have posted as I havent actually mentioned anything to do with reasoning have I?
And it (IMO) then goes on to rather wispily suggest that this mindset of mine is to support a defence for rapists which excuse me IS actually a slur on character no matter how vaguely or terminated in inquisitors you make it as the two scenarios you show stop at the visual assumption, IE "she looked sexy therefore was up for it your honour"
Which again doesnt actually mirror anything I've posted nor the gist or content of the initial header does it? To do that the "sexy gyrating sex pot" would also have needed to have been telling the bloke how much she wanted to fuck him, agreed to go "somewhere quiet" with him and shagged his brains out willingly but then not been able to remember much of the night and accused him of rape which excuse me for NOT thinking should end in a conviction oddly enough
Also re character were your sort of cleverly comments about my views on sex meaning that it would be brainwashing daughters into subserviently providing sex on tap either
Infact I would say my views would, if anything be more likely to give my daughter a grounded and anything but "subservient" view on what sex is and what it also isnt
So yeah, suggesting I am raising my daughter to be a cock hopping whore who will drop her bum floss g-string for any man who fancies a ride does feel just the tiniest bit like a wander outside of the thread topic and content and into the realms of character assumption really
Which doesnt actually bother me otherwise I'd have brought it up at the time, but when you then start bleating about me doing the same in response to your posts it becomes relevant obviously
Sleep tight :tongue: | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 4:39:05 PM | I cannot understand how ANYONE can honestly say its normal for a man to expect sex from a woman who flirts with them....
Either there are some very ugly people who dont get flirted with often on here or some odd bods... I flirt with people quite a lot, in shops when i want to get something from a high shelf but cant reach for example... So should the man who got me my Andrex quilted from a high shelf expect to have sex with me because i flirted with him a little to get him to get it for me??
Get real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 4:51:42 PM |
I cannot understand how ANYONE can honestly say its normal for a man to expect sex from a woman who flirts with them....
Either there are some very ugly people who dont get flirted with often on here or some odd bods... I flirt with people quite a lot, in shops when i want to get something from a high shelf but cant reach for example... So should the man who got me my Andrex quilted from a high shelf expect to have sex with me because i flirted with him a little to get him to get it for me??
Get real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I guess it would depend on the flirting really
Unless of course you are claiming you dont flirt with people you DONT want to shag of course, in which case theres no ambiguity there
There is also degree tho too
What you might do when you ARE flirting with intent to shag someone could be quite tame compared to someone else when they are just messing about
Similarly, what you do when you dont want to shag them could be far more suggestive than what another woman would be doing if she WAS intending to shag someone as a result of it
Theres no benchmark there at all
But perhaps in the same way men are being expected to ask for permission to continue to shag someone who has just ripped their clothes off and pulled them on top of them to avoid any confusion maybe you should say BEFORE you start flirting whether or not youre planning to screw the person at the end of it eh?
No confuddlication then at all is there?
And I really dont think someone fluttering their eyelashes like a retard just so some idiot will get them some arse paper is quite what most people would mean by "very flirtacious" anyway unless you've only just been released from a convent
Things I've experienced that I would class as "very flirtacious" would include the simulated BJ with a finger thingy, someone fingering themselves in a nightclub then popping their finger in their mouth, or saying things like but not limited to "you really dont think youre going to screw me without buying me another drink first do you?" , "I have this bit of dry skin I'd like you too examine closely to see if you can moisten it up later if youre a good boy" and "if you can move like that off the dancefloor then I think were both going to have a lot of aches and pains in the morning"
That to me is "very flirtacious" and I would class anyone who DIDNT think they were quite probably going to get a shag at the end of it as being quite retarded actually
But STILL, "expecting" youre going to get sex means nothing whatsoever, two out of the five times I mentioned I DIDNT get laid, I also didnt beat the shit out of them and rape them either
So exactly, and in nice plain english WHAT exactly was the problem with me "expecting" to get laid in any of those situations according to your train of thinking?
So I would also say "get real" if you DONT think those were quite likely indications of sex being VERY likely | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 4:54:05 PM | ^ errrrr thats not flirting, thats being slutty!
Flirting is saying things like "i like that shirt, where is it from?" whilst removing an imaginary hair from the collar...
What is mentioned in the post above is NOT flirty, its whore like | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 5:16:05 PM | Now to me that would simply be someone asking me about my shirt and removing something a hair from it
Nothing in the slightest bit flirtacious there at all really unless you were licking your eyebrows while you did it
But even that, were it clearly done in a flirtacious manner could be seen as a suggestion you fancy someone, as that IS sort of the point of flirtation
Infact its definition is "playful behavior intended to arouse or show sexual interest "
So even in its most purile form its hardly an unreasonable assumption in some situations for it to be seen as a clear indication the person flirting is sexually attracted to you
That IS what it was originally used to convey
Now if someone in an office flirted with everyone then yeah, I'd agree its a bit of a leap to assume its more than playful banter
If someone in a nightclub is flirting with everyone same applies
But I really dont think most people would assume sex was likely if THAT was the case anyway
If however it wasnt everyone but was JUST them, and the flirting was sexually orientated and went on exclusively between just the two of them for hours then its not really the same thing as your bog roll example is it?
Most people see that kind of light hearted banter daily and never give it a second thought, but are you trying to claim that ALL flirtation is JUST as innocent, non sexually suggestive and randomly dispersed?
If so are you still a virgin then?
Because actually getting to have sex with no form of flirtation any different to what you would have done to get the bog roll would make (I suspect) people wary of trying to boink you
I'd also guess that when you DO fancy someone your flirting is MASSIVELY different to what you would have done in the bog roll scenario yes? Am I right?
And you say "whore like" as tho its a bad thing lol ;)
The point I am making tho is there are an immense amount of ways and degrees of flirting, so to assume men would "expect sex" based on the most innocent, boring and none sexually suggestive forms imagineable as tho they are the ONLY forms of flirtation is a bit ridiculous really unless of course thats how women would view it if a bloke was lightheartedly flirting with them of course in which case its still not really very valid but is just more understandable
I think its pretty safe to assume that when most men would "expect sex" theres a bit more to it than a frigid non sexual chirpiness going on really
I also know for a fact its not exactly rare for women to assume they will be getting a good old rutting session when someone is heavily flirting with them, so are they wrong to expect sex in that situation too then?
Or is this just another one of those things where men are sex mad perverted scum for doing it but women are just being "liberated" when they do? | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 5:21:11 PM | ^
No you arent, please address the post and NOT the poster.
I dont flirt by placing my fingers inside my bits and inviting men to suck on them, i dont and wouldnt do that as not only is it weird but dancing around and all that then putting fingers there... No ta.
There is subtle flirting and then there are scenarios such as the ones mentioned in a post a few previously.
If someone thinks that flirting means "come on a fvck me this instant" without those words being spoken then they should maybe calm down and think a bit anyway.
Thats all i have to say on the matter i think, flirting does not mean "I WANT SEX NOW!" | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/14/2007 5:33:53 PM | But those arent the ONLY two extremes are they?
And flirting never or rarely means "I want sex now", if anything it usually means "I want sex later"
What you do seem to be deliberately trying to skirt around tho is that when two people DO want to shag each other they dont exactly tend to sit and talk about the latest stock prices in the times do they?
What they DO however tend to be doing is,,,,,wair for it,,,,,,,flirting like mad with each other as a way of making it clear what they DO want to do to each other
Where someone sits on the scale of how explicitly they flirt is just like any other aspect of people, it varies massively
And even with each individual it will vary between when they are innocently flirting without any sexual intent and when they are pointedly flirting with every intent
But without traffic lights surgically implanted into someones forehead only THEY know for sure which it is, and as some peoples innocent flirting is more explicit than other peoples pointed flirting there is an unnavoidable vagueness about the whole thing
Anyway, rather than expecting people to read your mind why as I suggested dont you think its a good idea to just say "I am going to want to **** you" or "I arent going to **** you" before you flirt each time?
Seeing as the topic is centred around the concept of consent that would surely make sense?
Or, is the problem that by removing the ambiguity of flirting you also remove the point of it? That when someone KNOWS there is no intent its no fun and stops having a purpose?
Because if thats the case then it means the flirting IS of a sexually suggestive nature anyway and wouldnt serve any purpose without that possibility doesnt it?
Feel free to not respond btw, its irrelevant | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 2:28:17 AM | We now seem to be having a discussion as to the meaning of 'flirtatious' as used in the Amnesty report.
"Flirt" - behave playfully in a sexually enticing manner.
"Entice" - attract by offering pleasure or advantage.
Therefore, any woman who acts in a flirtatious manner is offering sexual favours of some kind. It does not matter how 'subtle' the flirting is - it is only done with one intent.
So, if a man is the recipient of that attention, it is entirely acceptable of him to expect sexual pleasure. | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 3:33:44 AM | Objectively I dont think anyone REALLY is unaware of that
Infact flirting is really when unintentioned nothing more than a power trip if you look at it
Its the practice of saying "hey you, I bet you'd just luuuuurve some of this wouldnt ya",,,,,,,,," well ya cant so ner  ", playful yes, teasing, yes, sexually suggestive, well duh, it would be called conversation rather than "flirting" if it WASNT, unrelated to the suggestion of sex? Course not, again it would just be conversation then
If I walked up to a six foot bruiser and "playfully" insulted his mother that wouldnt be "flirting" would it?
And I would not be overstepping the mark in anyway if I "expected" to have my teeth knocked out
If he walked over to me with his fists tightly curled it would be a pretty good think to "expect" he was going to hit me infact
The fact I was only "playfully" insulting his mother is irrelevant tho of course, and if he DOES knock my teeth out he IS breaking the law and IS in the wrong
Does that make me completely innocent in the chain of events tho? Should I take no responsibility for any part I played?
Does "well I've insulted other peoples mothers and THEY knew I was only joking" or "he SHOULD have known I wasnt serious" really cut the mustard?
Or, should I just start to be a bit more responsible for my own actions in future instead of trying to feel blameless in a world where everything is everyone elses fault and where I feel like I am ALWAYS an innocent bystander who gets injured through no fault of my own?
I could claim that I SHOULD be able to say whatever I want to anyone and not have to worry about the consequences, but thats an "ideal world" concept, and I dont live in an "ideal world" I live in the real one.
And back here in the real world everything I do can and often does have rammifications that need to be considered along with the fact that ONLY I "KNOW" what thoughts and intentions are in MY head, everybody else in the world can only guess and many WILL guess incorrectly so I would need to think in terms of not only what I think, but also in terms of what someone else whos mother I insulted MIGHT think and how they MIGHT react no matter how rare such a tooth excavating encounter might be
thats just a fact of life and not a blip that needs to be ironed out | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 4:15:38 AM | On the subject of whether or not being too fliratious is asking to get raped. One would assume that if a woman is in a crowd of people, then rape is not possible, she has to be alone with the person to get raped. In which case if she has been overly flirtatious, often drink induced, then common sense should tell her that she is asking for trouble if she goes of with a guy.
The same goes women who bare all, lets face it, most women who wear skirts up to their thongs, and tops that show most of their boobs, do so to attract the opposit sex. Put in a bit of alcohol and you have the perfect recipe for trouble. I'm not saying it's right, but that's my opinion, and it makes me shudder.
As I said in my earlier post, I have been the victim of a rape. I was at a music festival, stone cold sober, and minding my own business, the rest is history... just my luck to have a deaf girlfriend who couldn't here my pleas of, leave me alone and, no! I was unlucky, and yes, rapists should face stiffer penalties, as far as I'm concerned, castration wouldn't have been enough.
There are two kinds of rapists, the opportunists, and the pre-meditated ones. The opportunists, are the ones most likely to latch onto the skimpily clad females at a disco or bar. I won't go into pre-meditiated rape as it affects me to much, I wasn't asking for it.
Bring back modesty, old fashioned though it may be, drink less, stick with your girlfriends, and don't flirt in a overly, suggestive or sexual manner.. that way women should be safer if nothing else, and parents watch what the teens are wearing when they go out. | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 4:27:27 AM |
Bring back modesty, old fashioned though it may be, drink less, stick with your girlfriends, and don't flirt in a overly, suggestive or sexual manner.. that way women should be safer if nothing else, and parents watch what the teens are wearing when they go out.
I'm sorry but you cannot blame women, their attire, their behaviour or where they happen to be and with whom on the fact that they get raped. Rape isn't about sex, it is an act of violence. Whether it is premeditated or opportunistic doesn't lessen the severity of the act. Men and women should stop insisting that women play a role in being raped, that they are culpable, it's outrageous that people think women are complicit in such a heinous crime against themselves. | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 4:48:05 AM | Nice post bette, the only thing in there I'd really question tho is the bit that says
most women who wear skirts up to their thongs, and tops that show most of their boobs, do so to attract the opposit sex
Without delving too far into the psychology of attire its not strictly true that most women would dress in a sexual manner to attract the "opposite sex", although that will be a large part of the mindset for women who are available and are up for some the majority arent exactly seeking to attract an actual member of the opposite sex, but simply the attention of, or to be noticed by them
IE, many women will take a lot of time so they feel and look good when they go out but wont actually be on the pull, even if single it doesnt mean that on THAT night they would welcome even a gorgeous bloke chatting them up
But if they felt good, thought they looked good and realised that not a single head turned, not one person looked at them approvingly and not even their friends commented on how good they looked many women whether they would admit it or not would feel deflated as a result
Although much of what women wear is designed to highlight and showcase their sexuality, and as much as most social constructs of what looks "good" and what doesnt is based quite clearly around what WILL be appealing to men or women who are avid perveyors of the female form that doesnt exactly leap to the assumption that the aim is to actually "get" someone, more acurately its closer to wanting to get people to WANT to get them or to think about what getting them would be like
Infact its not exactly heard of for a woman to claim that certain outfits make her feel "sexy" and wear them even if she is happily married or dating, not on the pull and isnt out with her husband/boyfriend which kind of separates the "attracting a member of the opposite sex" and "attracting the ATTENTION only of members of the opposite sex" quite nicely
I would actually suspect that if a man had written what you just wrote he would be hung drawn and quartered for intimating that women dressed sexily are "asking" for make attention however, but because youre a woman you'll probably get away with making that suggestion scot free | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 5:02:19 AM |
I'm sorry but you cannot blame women, their attire, their behaviour or where they happen to be and with whom on the fact that they get raped. Rape isn't about sex, it is an act of violence. Whether it is premeditated or opportunistic doesn't lessen the severity of the act. Men and women should stop insisting that women play a role in being raped, that they are culpable, it's outrageous that people think women are complicit in such a heinous crime against themselves.
Actually she CAN, and infact just did
Theres no "cant" about it, its a view just like any other
Now I agree you cant "blame" a woman for being raped, IE its never going to be 100% her fault unless the puts a gun against a mans head and makes him do it, thats fairly obvious
But there isnt 100% blame up for grabs, there is 200%
The rapist IS 100% responsible for HIS actions and nothing a woman does or doesnt do lessens that in any way
But she is also responsible for her actions something he has no responsibility for
If someone puts themselves in a risky situation the rapist ISNT in the slightest bit "to blame" for her doing that in the same way she isnt to blame for him deciding to take advantage of the situation she chose to put herself in
Each is solely responsible for their own actions, choices and decisions
To claim rape is only about violence, power or control is like saying that because all cars have wheels it means ALL car crashes are about wheels. It doesnt float no matter how many people say it
And if it were the case then we would see an equal number of inherrently UNnattractive women being raped whilst wearing stained jog bottoms and manky overcoats which is rarely the case as most women are raped by someone who fancies them which is the initial reason they above others will be singled out where other potential victims are available
Sex is part of rape, and pretending otherwise just puts more women at risk by making them ignore some of the driving factors and focusing only on the ones they are told IS a reason for it
And trying to claim women DONT play a role in rape is equally dangerous as it does make women think they CAN act however they like, dress as they like, take as many risks as they like, be as vulnerable with strangers as they like BECAUSE, nothing THEY do in anyway whatsoever contributes to whether they get raped or not
So, it paints the picture a woman CAN dress in a miniskirt and boob tube, get hammers, flirt in as sexual manner as she likes, then go back to a complete strangers flat for coffee, neck a bit, give him a BJ, receive oral and then ALWAYS be able to just get up and go home without it EVER progressing further without her permission
BECAUSE nothing she ever does will affect her chances of getting raped,.........
That IS what that mindset claims
Now as much as I would agree that SHOULD always be the case, and even that it WILL be the case much of the time I most definitely wouldnt tell or suggest to any women that they should believe it will always be the case, not that if they did that they wouldnt be partly responsible for getting raped at the end of that scenario and think to suggest otherwise is putting that women in danger by intimating she isnt wrong to be so irresponsible with her own safety | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 6:10:23 AM | | Yes it's violent, and I should No! But if a woman is loud mouthed and dressed like a tart.. she will get trerated as one.. rightly or wrongly it's a fact... there are exceptions, I was one, but dressing in a manner to attract men.. showing thongs and boobs hanging out, is guaranteed to exite some pervert. They are about, and drunken under dressed women are a prime target..... | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 6:44:18 AM | Exactly msg 100, only a perverted person would rape another, ordinary men don't rape women!
Therefore to quote another poster Msg 76:
msg73 I stated that there are NO circumstances in which a man can force a woman into sex.
Why question a comment which is as straightforward as that, especially when most people on this thread agree with it?
There are no extenuating circumstances/reasons which can make the crime of rape defensible.
Rapists should be punished severely and the laws should be changed to make it easier to charge the guilty person with the crime.
Young people should be taught what rape is, they should be taught how to protect themselves but expecting women to behave defensively and deny who they are just in case they catch the eye of a pervert who wants to harm them is, in fact, insulting to all men because the inference is that any man could be tempted to rape a woman as they are, apparently, only capable of thinking with their d1cks. | |
|
| Camerons pledge to jail more rapists?? Feasible?
Posted: 11/15/2007 9:41:43 AM | Well I dont see how thats insulting to all men and I are one
Its common sense to accept there are SOME people in society who will be like that, so swanning around as tho there arent is just stupid
Try applying that to muggings for a start, telling people that ALL people arent muggers so you shouldnt have to be wary when using cashpoints at night, and you shouldnt need to be wary of walking down dark alleys late at night alone in a rough nieghbourhood
Lets assume that because ALL people dont have aids we shouldnt take precautions when having sex
That because ALL cars dont have faulty brakes we dont REALLY need to bother having them checked
Infact lets push the boat out eh? Lets tell people that ALL people arent burglars and ALL people arent bad drivers so we can all leave our homes unlocked and cross the road without bothering to look eh?
And ALL muslims arent terrorists, so lets all pretend like none of them are too?
See how silly that perspective is yet?
Being wary of strangers ISNT the same as assuming all of them ARE rapists, its assuming all COULD be which is different
Its called taking responsibility for your OWN safety, if someone gets narked because you dont trust them until you know them better then theyre a****ead anyway, and a woman who doesnt take personal responsibility for her own safety is no better (would that be a twat head dya reckon?) | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 5
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
|
Home
login 