NationStates

Ethel mermania wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Those are people who are trying to have sex and failing at it. I agree, they should shut up.

they cant have sex and they cant complain about it, what the hell is left?

Antrema wrote:

Revolutopia wrote:
They do have those rape condoms with blades now.


In answer to the original question, no this a stupid idea.

What about rape condoms with industrial cutting equipment? I.E. a chainsaw or disc cutter

The Cummunist State wrote:why is the same not for men? Why is their default position yes?

Mainly Boring Passtimes wrote:

The Cummunist State wrote:why is the same not for men? Why is their default position yes?

Penis function 101.

The Blaatschapen wrote:

Ethel mermania wrote:
they cant have sex and they cant complain about it, what the hell is left?

Figuring out why they can't have sex and do something about it.

The Blaatschapen wrote:

Ethel mermania wrote:
they cant have sex and they cant complain about it, what the hell is left?

Figuring out why they can't have sex and do something about it.

Grainne Ni Malley wrote:

The Blaatschapen wrote:
Figuring out why they can't have sex and do something about it.

Hello, I am an advocate for OPP, Other People's Problems. It has come to our attention that you are attempting to interfere in the problems of others. We have a cease and desist order here. Thank you and have a great day!

Itanica wrote:

Lord Tothe wrote:No, only men can be sexist. Women generalizing about men aren't being sexist.

I sincerely hope that is a joke

If it is not, I feel sorry for you.

Four-sided Triangles wrote:
You're still benefiting from the system of male privilege.

Oh god just shut up already.
"System of male privilege"
That's bullshit and you know it. If anything, men are disadvantaged.

Who gets all the money in a divorce? Women.
Who can scream rape and ruin your life? Women.
Who is obligated to pay for the dinner at a date? Men
Who is obligated to buy their partner nice things? Men
Who is obligated to pay support for the child in a divorce? Men
Who always gets custody of the child in a divorce? Women
Who decides when the couple can / cannot have sex? Women

(Image)
(Image)
(Image)

I'm not saying women are inferior to men, but god damn it FST, your arguments are completely flawed. Perhaps 60 years ago, they would be valid points. But now? No. Get over it, you are not automatically an oppressor if you have something protruding out of your pelvic area.

Grainne Ni Malley wrote:

Itanica wrote:Oh god just shut up already.
"System of male privilege"
That's bullshit and you know it. If anything, men are disadvantaged.

Who gets all the money in a divorce? Women. Whomever the courts decide is most deserving of it depending upon the circumstances presented.
Who can scream rape and ruin your life? Women. Anyone. Men get raped, too.
Who is obligated to pay for the dinner at a date? MenWhomever is in the most desperate need of getting laid.
Who is obligated to buy their partner nice things? Men Mutual obligation.
Who is obligated to pay support for the child in a divorce? Men Whomever has custody of the children.
Who always gets custody of the child in a divorce? WomenThe most fit parent.
Who decides when the couple can / cannot have sex? Women Both parties, unless it's rape.

(Image)
(Image)
(Image)

I'm not saying women are inferior to men, but god damn it FST, your arguments are completely flawed. Perhaps 60 years ago, they would be valid points. But now? No. Get over it, you are not automatically an oppressor if you have something protruding out of your pelvic area.

Fix'd. Let's be real here.

Also: "Shut up" is not typically conducive to the proceedings of a debate. Just saying.

Wikkiwallana wrote:All but the last of those is wrong, and seeing as how it's the woman who risks getting pregnant, damn right she decides when sex happens.

Idaho Conservatives wrote:FST creates a half-assed thread, goes on his same old feminist rant, and it turns into a thirty page dogpile in under twenty four hours. Just another day on NSG.

Itanica wrote:Men do get raped, indeed, but when they accuse a woman of raping them, compared to a woman accusing a man of raping them. Which cases yield better results for the accuser?

Also, generally speaking in a heterosexual couple, the woman is the one who decides if they are allowed sex or not. The man has the instincts and will be ready for sex all the time should he be aroused, but he will not be able to have it with his partner until she allows it. Of course there are a good many exceptions, but that's the general rule it seems. (Friends' experiences, personal experiences, etc)
Hard to put it into wording, but what I'm basically saying is the woman controls the sex in a majority heterosexual relationships.

Oh and it is most definitely not always the most fit parent. A person I know was divorced, he had a son and he wasn't granted custody of the child. The mother was a heroin addict and the man was paying child support which the woman used to fuel her addiction. He had to fight several legal battles to get the courts to see this and give the child back to him. There are countless other cases like this.
inb4 source or gtfo, a decent bit of google searching will yield you infinite results

1000 Cats wrote:From a friend of mine:

"All women just need to carry with them rape prevention kits, which would include a can of mace, steel cap boots, and a pack of prophylactics in case they change their mind and a romance blooms."

Yes Im Biop wrote:

1000 Cats wrote:From a friend of mine:

"All women just need to carry with them rape prevention kits, which would include a can of mace, steel cap boots, and a pack of prophylactics in case they change their mind and a romance blooms."

SOunds liek one of my friends XD Though Mace can be resisted. I suggest a 150,000 Volt Tazer and a .32 cal Derrenger

1000 Cats wrote:

Yes Im Biop wrote:
SOunds liek one of my friends XD Though Mace can be resisted. I suggest a 150,000 Volt Tazer and a .32 cal Derrenger

Tasers can also be resisted, much more easily than mace, especially one as low as one-fifty. Nine hundred or bust.

Yes Im Biop wrote:

1000 Cats wrote:Tasers can also be resisted, much more easily than mace, especially one as low as one-fifty. Nine hundred or bust.

900K Volts...Holy Shit...Ouch that would fry your balls at 100 feet XD

Ende wrote:

Wikkiwallana wrote:This seems much more reasonable, and not at all similar to the system in the OP.

No, let me explain. The system in the OP is the "Yes Model" according to the article. The proposal suggested in the article IS actually similar, but it's called the "Negotiation Model". It's just a better phrased, better thought out (and not crazy) model from the system in the OP and it's actually decently similar.

Read the article, will you?

Wikkiwallana wrote:

Hjornis wrote:

so if a girl dont sepesificly say "I want to have sex" its rape?

No, even if she does, according to the blogger:

Crazy blogger wrote:Well, what if lack of consent were the default? What if all prospective objects of dudely predation — by whom I mean all women — are a priori considered to have said “no”? What if women, in other words, were seen by the courts to abide in a persistent legal condition of keep-the-fuck-off-me?

A straight girl could still have as much sex as she wants with men, if for some reason she thinks it’s a good idea (naturally I would most vigorously urge self-identified heterosexual women to contemplate the horrific personal and political implications of submitting to male domination in this way. But that’s another post). All she’d have to do is not call the cops. No harm no foul.

But if, at any time during the course of the proceedings, up to and including the storied infinitesimal microsecond preceding the sacred spilling of dudely seed, the woman elects to biff off to the nearest taco stand; and if her egress from the sweaty tableau is in any way impeded by the pronger (such an impediment would include everything from “traditional” brute force, to that insistently whispered declamation “just a couple more minutes, I’m almost there” the dread seriousness of which the fervid oaf dramatizes by that ever-so-slight tightening of his grip on her wrist); or if, in three hours or three days or, perhaps in the case of childhood abuse, in 13 years it begins to dawn on her that she has been badly used by an opportunistic predator, she has simply to make a call.

Presto! The dude is already a rapist, because, legally, consent never existed.

Emphasis mine. Consent is literally impossible, it does not, can not, happen. Instead what happens is "I didn't feel like pressing charges".

And she knows it:

Ibid. wrote:I grasp that, technically, the plan criminalizes all male participants in heterosexual sex.

Well, what of it? The set-up now, with the emphasis — in a misogynist world with a misogynist judiciary — on whether or not women “give” consent, is that female participants are all infinitely rapeable, because all some perv has to do is say, “she said yes.”

Sane blogger wrote:Anderson is right in that we should take a closer look at the way we define rape so as not to place the onus of consent solely on one partner's shoulders. However, I would argue that in order to change the way we think about rape we need to change the way we think about sex. In our society, sex is primarily viewed and discussed in what Thomas Millar describes as the “commodity view of sex.” Basically, sex is something to be given, taken, bought, sold, traded, stolen, and/or withheld. Sex is a type of good which exists in a supply and demand type structure and “women have it and men try to get it.” Women are often seen as controlling the supply of sex; facing shame when they ‘give it away’ too easily or to too many people.

How often, in the media, in popular culture, in abstinence only programs, and in the way we talk about sex every day, are women portrayed as the gatekeepers to sex, while men are expected to be constantly seeking it? Millar proposes that we view sex as a performance between active participants much like a musical group performing together. This view of sex is non hetero-normative and encourages collaboration, discussion, and interaction between sexual partners. It is this view of sex that speaks in favor of adopting the Negotiation Model of understanding rape.

Under the Yes and No Models, victims must prove that they did not ‘consent’ or did not allow someone to have sex with them. Under these models sex is a commodity and women are assumed to be sexually passive; either affirming or denying men's sexual advances. In other words, women are not considered to be active participants in sex. When sex is viewed as a performance rather than a commodity, discussions about rape focus on how both partners were actively involved in communicating their desires rather than on what steps the victim took to communicate his/her lack of desire to ‘give it up.’

When we begin to think about sex as a performance and define rape as a failure to negotiate or discuss sexual desires, than we do not look to the victim to prove the ways in which he/she expressed 'no,' but rather we look to the perpetrator to see what he/she failed to do to ensure that his/her sexual desires were discussed and reciprocated. In the courtroom, this will translate into clearer evidence standards as judges and jurors will decide if the perpetrator had clearly communicated that he/she wanted to move from heavy petting to penetration. While still subjective, this is a better way to understand rape cases than judges and jurors deciding if consent for penetration was implied because the victim had consented to heavy petting.

Itanica wrote:Men do get raped, indeed, but when they accuse a woman of raping them, compared to a woman accusing a man of raping them. Which cases yield better results for the accuser?

Also, generally speaking in a heterosexual couple, the woman is the one who decides if they are allowed sex or not. The man has the instincts and will be ready for sex all the time should he be aroused, but he will not be able to have it with his partner until she allows it. Of course there are a good many exceptions, but that's the general rule it seems. (Friends' experiences, personal experiences, etc)
Hard to put it into wording, but what I'm basically saying is the woman controls the sex in a majority heterosexual relationships.

Oh and it is most definitely not always the most fit parent. A person I know was divorced, he had a son and he wasn't granted custody of the child. The mother was a heroin addict and the man was paying child support which the woman used to fuel her addiction. He had to fight several legal battles to get the courts to see this and give the child back to him. There are countless other cases like this.
inb4 source or gtfo, a decent bit of google searching will yield you infinite results

1000 Cats wrote:

Yes Im Biop wrote:
900K Volts...Holy Shit...Ouch that would fry your balls at 100 feet XD

And are available for civilian use... and can still be resisted.

1000 Cats wrote:From a friend of mine:

"All women just need to carry with them rape prevention kits, which would include a can of mace, steel cap boots, and a pack of prophylactics in case they change their mind and a romance blooms."

Itanica wrote:

Grainne Ni Malley wrote:
Fix'd. Let's be real here.

Also: "Shut up" is not typically conducive to the proceedings of a debate. Just saying.

Men do get raped, indeed, but when they accuse a woman of raping them, compared to a woman accusing a man of raping them. Which cases yield better results for the accuser?

Also, generally speaking in a heterosexual couple, the woman is the one who decides if they are allowed sex or not. The man has the instincts and will be ready for sex all the time should he be aroused, but he will not be able to have it with his partner until she allows it. Of course there are a good many exceptions, but that's the general rule it seems. (Friends' experiences, personal experiences, etc)
Hard to put it into wording, but what I'm basically saying is the woman controls the sex in a majority heterosexual relationships.

Oh and it is most definitely not always the most fit parent. A person I know was divorced, he had a son and he wasn't granted custody of the child. The mother was a heroin addict and the man was paying child support which the woman used to fuel her addiction. He had to fight several legal battles to get the courts to see this and give the child back to him. There are countless other cases like this.
inb4 source or gtfo, a decent bit of google searching will yield you infinite results