Would you defend yourself against an angry violent woman? Page 6

  • Page

    of 10 First / Last

  • kickerconspiracy 14 Jan 2013 15:55:09 494 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I think the thing I've learnt from this thread that is whenever I'm having intercourse to stop and make sure at 3 minute intervals that permission is still granted.

    Edited by kickerconspiracy at 15:55:56 14-01-2013
  • whatfruit 14 Jan 2013 15:55:55 1,694 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Ah shit I got myself confused earlier. when I said a man can't rape a man I meant to say a woman can't rape a man without a surrogate penis/pineapple.

    bobomb wrote:
    so it's not really on her terms, it's on his terms, because she isn't real.

  • SClaw 14 Jan 2013 15:56:20 826 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    SClaw wrote:
    AcidSnake wrote:
    kalel wrote: and,

    _ A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

    "And"?
    Really?
    So as long as A really thinks he has consent all's good?

    "Sure she was unconscious, but she didn't say no..."
    That's not consent; that an assumption. However, you could argue it if A had a witness who heard B agree to the sex earlier. But even so - that does not mean B didn't change their mind later. It's a very difficult legal area basically setting one's word against another.
    And this ... this is scary. This gives a loophole to all the bastards who hear a girl being overflirty with them in front of her friends, and so feel they can do whatever they please with impunity later.
    No. No really. Legal precedent favours the victim when these things get to trial; witnesses are usually unreliable in these cases because they arenít (usually) there at the moment it goes in, watching for a thumbs up from the victim. They aren't to say what happened at that moment.

    But that is a problem pre-trial, as the police have a tough time pulling enough evidence together to make anything chargable. They canít risk a vindictive person withdrawing consent after the fact as a petty attack; but they canít let an actual rape slide either. Itís very hard to prove anything in that sort of a situation, and there is no ďsafeĒ way to play it because either way you might ruin a life.
  • whatfruit 14 Jan 2013 15:56:53 1,694 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    kickerconspiracy wrote:
    I think the thing I've learnt from this thread that is whenever I'm having intercourse to stop and make sure at 3 minute intervals that permission is still granted.
    Better yet get her to sign a waiver.

    bobomb wrote:
    so it's not really on her terms, it's on his terms, because she isn't real.

  • Deleted user 14 January 2013 15:59:56
    whatfruit wrote:
    Ah shit I got myself confused earlier. when I said a man can't rape a man I meant to say a woman can't rape a man without a surrogate penis/pineapple.
    Still wrong. Yes they can, rape isn't having something inserted without consent, it's intercourse without consent.
  • elstoof 14 Jan 2013 16:01:39 8,325 posts
    Seen 35 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Subtle psychological torment over long a period of time, with a complete break down of self esteem and worth works a lot better in the long run I find.
  • RedSparrows 14 Jan 2013 16:02:09 24,297 posts
    Seen 23 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    whatfruit wrote:
    Ah shit I got myself confused earlier. when I said a man can't rape a man I meant to say a woman can't rape a man without a surrogate penis/pineapple.
    Isn't any forced sexual activity rape? I'm not really sure anyone who has ever been forced into having sex, even if they weren't penetrated (i.e. they were male and the attacker was female), would be happy that they couldn't call it it what it is because it didn't fit one model of rape.
  • Deleted user 14 January 2013 16:02:36
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    SClaw wrote:
    AcidSnake wrote:
    kalel wrote: and,

    _ A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

    "And"?
    Really?
    So as long as A really thinks he has consent all's good?

    "Sure she was unconscious, but she didn't say no..."
    That's not consent; that an assumption. However, you could argue it if A had a witness who heard B agree to the sex earlier. But even so - that does not mean B didn't change their mind later. It's a very difficult legal area basically setting one's word against another.
    And this ... this is scary. This gives a loophole to all the bastards who hear a girl being overflirty with them in front of her friends, and so feel they can do whatever they please with impunity later.
    There isn't a loophole.

    And fingering without consent is sexual assault (or a nice surprise, whatever).
  • LeoliansBro 14 Jan 2013 16:03:24 44,966 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I know, I was just going with what SClaw seemed to think.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Deleted user 14 January 2013 16:05:04
    But he's a cretin.
  • LeoliansBro 14 Jan 2013 16:05:42 44,966 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    A rapey cretin.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • SClaw 14 Jan 2013 16:07:15 826 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Takes one to know one?

    Wow. I haven't used that since primary school.
  • Alastair 14 Jan 2013 16:07:33 16,408 posts
    Seen 19 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    There was that whole thing recently with the guy who had sex with a woman while she was asleep in the morning, having had consensual sex the night before. I think he got done for rape, but his argument was he assumed it was ok.
    Erm, that's Julian Assange isn't it?
  • Deleted user 14 January 2013 16:08:00
    SClaw wrote:
    Takes one to know one?

    Wow. I haven't used that since primary school.
    Might be a reason for that, Rapey.

    Edited by Aargh. at 16:08:28 14-01-2013
  • SClaw 14 Jan 2013 16:09:30 826 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Aargh. wrote:
    SClaw wrote:
    Takes one to know one?

    Wow. I haven't used that since primary school.
    Might be a reason for that, Rapey.

    Edited by Aargh. at 16:08:28 14-01-2013
    That's MR Rapey to you.
  • chopsen 14 Jan 2013 16:10:20 16,290 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Alastair wrote:
    kalel wrote:
    There was that whole thing recently with the guy who had sex with a woman while she was asleep in the morning, having had consensual sex the night before. I think he got done for rape, but his argument was he assumed it was ok.
    Erm, that's Julian Assange isn't it?
    I thought his case was about changing lanes at the last moment.
  • whatfruit 14 Jan 2013 16:10:27 1,694 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Hang on Argh

    Under section 1(1) SOA 2003 a defendant, A, is guilty of rape if:

    _ A intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of B (the complainant) with his penis;

    _ B does not consent to the penetration; and,

    _ A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

    How can a woman penetrate a man sans insertation device? If she rubs her fanny on my face without my consent is that rape?

    This thread has gone pretty drastically off piste.

    Edited by whatfruit at 16:11:47 14-01-2013

    bobomb wrote:
    so it's not really on her terms, it's on his terms, because she isn't real.

  • boo 14 Jan 2013 16:12:58 11,947 posts
    Seen 21 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Where's rapebear when you need him?
    Or indeed, rapewhale.

    Just Another Lego Blog

  • AcidSnake 14 Jan 2013 16:13:37 7,298 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    SClaw wrote:
    Aargh. wrote:
    SClaw wrote:
    Takes one to know one?

    Wow. I haven't used that since primary school.
    Might be a reason for that, Rapey.

    Edited by Aargh. at 16:08:28 14-01-2013
    That's the talented MR Rapey to you.
    Fixed

    AcidSnake - He can't see your sig, avatar, images or vids and talks about himself in the third person because he's proper old-skool...UID 24017

  • Alastair 14 Jan 2013 16:15:46 16,408 posts
    Seen 19 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Chopsen wrote:
    Alastair wrote:
    kalel wrote:
    There was that whole thing recently with the guy who had sex with a woman while she was asleep in the morning, having had consensual sex the night before. I think he got done for rape, but his argument was he assumed it was ok.
    Erm, that's Julian Assange isn't it?
    I thought his case was about changing lanes at the last moment.
    Maybe it was George Galloway then...
  • neilka 14 Jan 2013 16:16:30 16,559 posts
    Seen 7 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    boo wrote:
    Where's rapebear when you need him?
    Or indeed, rapewhale.
    Tokyo

    BAAANG!!!!! EXPLOTION!!!!!

  • Deleted user 14 January 2013 16:20:16
    whatfruit wrote:
    Hang on Argh

    Under section 1(1) SOA 2003 a defendant, A, is guilty of rape if:

    _ A intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of B (the complainant) with his penis;

    _ B does not consent to the penetration; and,

    _ A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

    How can a woman penetrate a man sans insertation device? If she rubs her fanny on my face without my consent is that rape?

    This thread has gone pretty drastically off piste.
    You're reading the wrong section. Try 19F.
  • Deleted user 14 January 2013 16:21:42
    Alastair wrote:
    Chopsen wrote:
    Alastair wrote:
    kalel wrote:
    There was that whole thing recently with the guy who had sex with a woman while she was asleep in the morning, having had consensual sex the night before. I think he got done for rape, but his argument was he assumed it was ok.
    Erm, that's Julian Assange isn't it?
    I thought his case was about changing lanes at the last moment.
    Maybe it was George Galloway then...
    Galloway definitely had a say on it or something. I remember him feeling quite strongly that the sex with a sleeping woman thing was fine.
  • fletch7100 14 Jan 2013 16:24:23 7,446 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Well with the increase of this defence being used. Get ready to see Sexsomina Sloth
  • macmurphy 14 Jan 2013 16:24:59 999 posts
    Seen 2 weeks ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Stop at three minute intervals?

    If I make three minutes I want a high five. Never made six, ever.
  • Dangerous_Dan 14 Jan 2013 16:46:44 2,378 posts
    Seen 4 months ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Hah, that's why you always tape your intercourse, at least the audio ;)
    haha, but yeah actually if you have casual sex with strangers it may be a good idea.
  • chopsen 14 Jan 2013 16:47:57 16,290 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Then you'd need to ask consent to record it. I'm pretty sure it's not legal to secretly film people you're shagging.
  • kickerconspiracy 14 Jan 2013 16:51:12 494 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @macmurphy

    Try thinking about the Wii U thread if you're trying to delay.

    Works for me.

    Edited by kickerconspiracy at 16:52:05 14-01-2013
  • Deleted user 14 January 2013 17:08:46
    Picked up some good tips in here :D
  • Page

    of 10 First / Last

Log in or register to reply