quote:What if they freeze up or get scared and just stay silent the whole time or go with it?
I don't know about you, but I would be turned completely off within a second if a girl I was intending to have sex with, had frozen up or stayed silent the whole time. Even if it happened after she had peeled the necessary articles of clothing off.
I think it's universally true, that if one partner is simply letting the other get off, you have an ethical obligation to stop trying to have sex with them.
I'm the same way but there's a huge difference between silence and 'no' which was what I was trying to say.
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Depends. I had a friend who was raped and she never said no. She passed out at a party and he assumed her lack of consciousness and no refusal was the same as a yes. If a girl freezes up or is unusually silent, I think the guy needs to make sure she is still conscious and capable of a no. Otherwise, it is rape.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yikes. If a man has to ask whether a woman is too drunk to consent - especially if her answer is silence!* - she may not be giving consent. Also what BlackBlade wrote.
Yes. Sometimes women lie about being raped and ruin men's lives and reputations. That is a rotten thing to do. Here is a helpful hint for men who want to avoid this: Until you know a woman well enough to judge that she is not the kind of woman who will do that, don't have sex with her. Until you know a woman well enough to recognize the difference between consent and terror or being too drunk to consent, don't have sex with her.
*She didn't say "no". She was in a coma, but she didn't say "no".
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:What if they freeze up or get scared and just stay silent the whole time or go with it?
I don't know about you, but I would be turned completely off within a second if a girl I was intending to have sex with, had frozen up or stayed silent the whole time. Even if it happened after she had peeled the necessary articles of clothing off.
I think it's universally true, that if one partner is simply letting the other get off, you have an ethical obligation to stop trying to have sex with them.
I'm the same way but there's a huge difference between silence and 'no' which was what I was trying to say.
There is also a huge difference between silence and "yes". You need a "yes".
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I meant that knowingly falsely accusing someone of a crime and committing the crime are equally as bad in my opinion, no matter what crime was supposedly committed.
This seems a strange belief to me: it's equally bad to falsely accuse someone of murdering John Doe as it is to go out yourself and murder John Doe?
quote: In the story, the girl did not say no to the man, even when he asked her 'Are you too drunk for this?'.
You are aware, aren't you, that this is a question with no correct answer if the person in question really is too drunk? If she's too drunk to consent, her response in either way will be suspect...because she's drunk.
quote:Until you know a woman well enough to recognize the difference between consent and terror or being too drunk to consent, don't have sex with her.
This right here, Soap.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Yikes. If a man has to ask whether a woman is too drunk to consent - especially if her answer is silence!* - she may not be giving consent. Also what BlackBlade wrote.
Yes. Sometimes women lie about being raped and ruin men's lives and reputations. That is a rotten thing to do. Here is a helpful hint for men who want to avoid this: Until you know a woman well enough to judge that she is not the kind of woman who will do that, don't have sex with her. Until you know a woman well enough to recognize the difference between consent and terror or being too drunk to consent, don't have sex with her.
*She didn't say "no". She was in a coma, but she didn't say "no".
What happens when both parties are "too drunk to consent" and they end up having sex anyway? Who's to blame? Of course, "passed out" is rape. Lack of memory doesn't prove rape.
The man won't wake up next to a woman with no memory of what occurred and accuse rape. He wont feel violated, he'll be upset he can't remember what it was like. Of course, if he wakes up next to a hideous morbidly obese woman he might be glad he can't remember. That's something he would "never do willingly"....of course. If we lived in a just society, men would accuse fat women of rape for the same reasons.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Yikes. If a man has to ask whether a woman is too drunk to consent - especially if her answer is silence!* - she may not be giving consent. Also what BlackBlade wrote.
Yes. Sometimes women lie about being raped and ruin men's lives and reputations. That is a rotten thing to do. Here is a helpful hint for men who want to avoid this: Until you know a woman well enough to judge that she is not the kind of woman who will do that, don't have sex with her. Until you know a woman well enough to recognize the difference between consent and terror or being too drunk to consent, don't have sex with her.
*She didn't say "no". She was in a coma, but she didn't say "no".
What happens when both parties are "too drunk to consent" and they end up having sex anyway? Who's to blame? Of course, "passed out" is rape. Lack of memory doesn't prove rape.
The man won't wake up next to a woman with no memory of what occurred and accuse rape. He wont feel violated, he'll be upset he can't remember what it was like. Of course, if he wakes up next to a hideous morbidly obese woman he might be glad he can't remember. That's something he would "never do willingly"....of course. If we lived in a just society, men would accuse fat women of rape for the same reasons.
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Yikes. If a man has to ask whether a woman is too drunk to consent - especially if her answer is silence!* - she may not be giving consent. Also what BlackBlade wrote.
Yes. Sometimes women lie about being raped and ruin men's lives and reputations. That is a rotten thing to do. Here is a helpful hint for men who want to avoid this: Until you know a woman well enough to judge that she is not the kind of woman who will do that, don't have sex with her. Until you know a woman well enough to recognize the difference between consent and terror or being too drunk to consent, don't have sex with her.
*She didn't say "no". She was in a coma, but she didn't say "no".
What happens when both parties are "too drunk to consent" and they end up having sex anyway? Who's to blame? Of course, "passed out" is rape. Lack of memory doesn't prove rape.
The man won't wake up next to a woman with no memory of what occurred and accuse rape. He wont feel violated, he'll be upset he can't remember what it was like. Of course, if he wakes up next to a hideous morbidly obese woman he might be glad he can't remember. That's something he would "never do willingly"....of course. If we lived in a just society, men would accuse fat women of rape for the same reasons.
You are an idiot, and I am glad I don't know you IRL. I wish I didn't here.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: What happens when both parties are "too drunk to consent" and they end up having sex anyway? Who's to blame? Of course, "passed out" is rape. Lack of memory doesn't prove rape.
The man won't wake up next to a woman with no memory of what occurred and accuse rape. He wont feel violated, he'll be upset he can't remember what it was like. Of course, if he wakes up next to a hideous morbidly obese woman he might be glad he can't remember. That's something he would "never do willingly"....of course. If we lived in a just society, men would accuse fat women of rape for the same reasons.
Reading your posts should at least count as a statuatory charge.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just as possible as it is for him to not write blatantly offensive, inane posts without demonstrating any willingness to scale back, until he tries everyone's patience.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't agree with much of what Mal says in any given discussion. But I think there is a qualitative difference between someone making insensitive or even offensive analogies (and generally sounding like an ignorant clod) and just blatantly insulting that person. I don't think the insults are called for.
Quite frankly, I think Mal is hardly alone in making wild generalizations, mischaracterizing those who disagree with him, and generally being an offensive jerk. I have no interest in calling anyone out, but I can think of several other posters on Hatrack who act in a way I consider just as shameful as Mal, and yet I think they get a greater pass for it. I'm not sure if this is because they've been here longer, or because they're generally being clods on behalf of, instead of in opposition to, leftist politics.
One person I will call out is Clive. Clive's posts have a tendency to go over the line from general ignorance/insensitivity into extreme, hateful diatribe. I don't think Mal is anywhere near that level, and I think it's unfair to treat him that way.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've tried, multiple times, but I felt that post was way beyond the pale. Mal doesn't get to speak for all men, not when I am one and I disagree with pretty much every thing he says.
If these really are his views, and not just trolling (which I doubt), then he is pretty despicable. He is one of the very, very few people I feel this place would be better without, and I have noticed a distinct turn for the worst since mal and clive/cindy have been posting here.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, regardless of the side issue of what is and isn't rape, I have a question about the original issue.
Given, for the sake of argument, that a man twice convicted of sexual misconduct has some kind of problem, is it wrong to "out" him?
If we had some kind of results, do opinions differ between people who are parents and those who are not?
Posts: 270 | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what are you trying to accomplish with your childish insults, Kwea? I mean, besides making yourself look bad and breaking the TOS (incidentally, I whistled your post)?
I'm pretty sure you can establish that the things that mal says are considered abhorrent and ridiculous by just about everyone here without direct personal insults. Honestly, I think this would be established without you saying anything at all. And the insults don't really add anything to this, other than establish that you don't like him.
So, are you actually trying to accomplish anything with this? If so, what, and how do you think that you are doing so?
From my perspective, mal is posting as he does specifically to get reactions like the ones that you are giving him and, besides the problems inherent in the way you are posting, you are also feeding the troll that you seem to dislike so much, making him happy and reinforcing his behavior.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: I don't agree with much of what Mal says in any given discussion. But I think there is a qualitative difference between someone making insensitive or even offensive analogies (and generally sounding like an ignorant clod) and just blatantly insulting that person. I don't think the insults are called for.
Unfortunately, it's practically impossible to expect that the entire forum will be wholly patient and not drift across the surprisingly substanceless line between only indirectly insulting him and just finally, after hundreds of mind-deadening posts, rolling their eyes and going oh my god shut up. And I wouldn't want them to be.
Your post, for example, is pretty clearly stating that, yes, Mal posts like an ignorant clod. I'm not going to treat 'mal generally sounds like an ignorant clod' that much differently than just moving to the direct insults like "mal, you are an ignorant clod" when and where he seems unable or unwilling to make the effort to stop being an ignorant clod who pollutes threads.
I guess we could continue being very civil (or at least, very technically indirect with our invicility) to fulfill this hope that there are no 'direct insults' towards an ignorant clod, but said ignorant clod would continue to pollute threads, inure himself to any factual rebuke, and cause the posters that the forum actually wants to keep to throw their hands up and stop posting on Hatrack.
I've watched malanthrop twice now pull "teh gay = teh pedophilia lolz" in this current iteration of late-night posting sprees, so I'm even more inclined to stick with my standard strategy: entertainment.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I dont know, I read his post and thought he was joking.
If Mal doesn't like heavier women, that is his preference. I am sure there are some people that wouldn't mind waking up to a large woman. To each his own. Generalizing was his mistake.
I just avoid situations like that by not drinking. Then again, I am married and get to sleep next to the most gorgeous woman in the world every night. How she puts up with me is beyond me. I consider myself conservative, she is big on liberalism. Somehow it works.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
