"Women want sex, just not with YOU."

[Choronzon]

What do you think is funny?

The unruly manner discourse employed by "the enemy" within this thread is quite exhilarating to me. How they fall into sarcasm-protection mode the moment their arguments have reached the end of validity and the stereotypical insults, including their favourite phrase: "You are a rape apologist". And still these people demand to be taken seriously, thinking they have any right at all to insult good Aghny here in such a manner. I have seen this whole drama before...and before that. It repeats and repeats, the very same imbeciles repeating the very same arguments, followed by the same insults and polemics. Truly hilarious, just post a few catchphrases and watch them go apeshit. Argument in a rational manner and they reach boiling point, retreating behind their wall of insults and polemics.

This is fucking pathetic. Seriously, are you this narcissistic and deluded where you think you've actually said a single intelligent thing all thread? I mean, your total ignorance when it comes to your own country's rape laws aside, you and your cohorts have not said a single smart, insightful, or in any way meaningful thing and yet you have the audacity to claim that you're making all these rational arguments that we're rejecting because we're big meanies. In reality, you've done nothing but make incredibly ignorant, grossly offensive comments to defend rapists. Look, I get it, it must be horribly shocking to learn that you think like a rapist. It must be unsettling to learn that you act and talk like a fucking rapist. But, seriously, if it bothers you that much stop being a fucking rapist, don't sit there and defend rapists and expect us to take such transparent, shallow, self serving defenses seriously. And don't lie to us about your career to impress us in place of a coherent argument, and definitely don't just dismiss the fucking law as mere opinion.

The only people who aren't taken seriously here are you, your ilk, and all the other MRA cronies. I usually refrain from moral judgements because nothing is True and all that shit but seriously, you're all bad people. Horrible fucking people. NSG and the world would be a better place if you all just packed up and left. But since that wont happen anytime soon public scorn is the only way to ensure that everyone knows what you people are and where your motives truly lie: you're rapists and rape apologists, and your goal is to justify your own sickening behavior.

And we are not deceived. Poor baby.

[Individuality-ness]

Humor me. Tell me how I deserved it.

do you still live with your mother?

I have no choice but to return to my house over breaks, I have no money to move out.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Quod erat demonstrandum.

That is not understanding. That is laughing at someone because they are angry, thus provoking more anger. This is not a rational, nor reasoned approach if the goal is to reach an understanding.

Frankly I have absolutely no desire to reach an understanding with him. The fact he lacks everything from basic empathy to basic intelligence is not my problem.

I wish it was, because that way I could deal with it in person and no one else would have to.

[Samuraikoku]

Yes, I must have missed the part wherein the law of the Federal Republic defines "consent" as you people do.

The age of consent in Germany is 14, as long as a person over the age of 21 does not exploit a 14–15 year-old person's lack of capacity for sexual self-determination, in which case a conviction of an individual over the age of 21 requires a complaint from the younger individual; being over 21 and engaging in sexual relations with a minor of that age does not constitute an offense in and of itself. Otherwise the age of consent is 14, although provisions protecting minors against coercion apply until the age of 18 (under section Section 182(1) it is illegal to engage in sexual activity with a person under 18 "by taking advantage of an exploitative situation"[21]).

As specified by Sections 176 (Sexual abuse of children) and 182 (Sexual abuse of youths), which read:

§ 176: "(1) Whoever commits sexual acts on a person under fourteen (14) years of age (a child) or allows them to be committed on himself by the child, shall be punished by imprisonment from six months to ten years [...]"

§ 180: "(1) Whoever abets the commission of sexual acts of a person under sixteen years of age on or in front of a third person or sexual acts of a third person on a person under sixteen years of age:

by acting as an intermediary; or
by furnishing or creating an opportunity,

shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine. [...]"

§ 182: "(2) A person over twenty-one years of age who abuses a person under sixteen years of age, in that he: 1. commits sexual acts on the person or allows them to be committed on himself by the person; or 2. induces the person to commit sexual acts on a third person or to allow them to be committed on the person by a third person, and thereby exploits the victim's lack of capacity for sexual self-determination, shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine. [...] The act shall only be prosecuted upon complaint, unless the prosecuting authority considers ex officio that it is required to enter the case because of the special public interest therein. [...] The court may dispense with punishment pursuant to these provisions if, in consideration of the conduct of the person against whom the act was directed, the wrongfulness of the act is slight."[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Germany

[Samuraikoku]

Yes, I must have missed the part wherein the law of the Federal Republic defines "consent" as you people do.

Read the law of the country you live in, it would help you out of trouble.

[Choronzon]

Yes, I must have missed the part wherein the law of the Federal Republic defines "consent" as you people do.

Read the law of the country you live in, it would help you out of trouble.

Its awesome when they're so cocky and so obviously wrong at the same time, ain't it?

[Samuraikoku]

Its awesome when they're so cocky and so obviously wrong at the same time, ain't it?

It's frustrating when you have to quote the law of the country someone lives in because they do not have the minimum amount of regard for their own law.

[Choronzon]

Its awesome when they're so cocky and so obviously wrong at the same time, ain't it?

It's frustrating when you have to quote the law of the country someone lives in because they do not have the minimum amount of regard for their own law.

Hey, its only Germany's opinion after all.

[Seperates]

That was an absolute, Obi.

Of course it was, Obi Wan is a servant of the true Sith Lord:

How convenient that at the end of Return of the Jedi, both Obi and Yoda are still alive and, "more powerful then you can possibly imagine," and all the other Jedi and Sith are dead, except for a kid so stupid that he made out with his own sister.

No, it actually was a representation of the true extent of the corruption of the Force. Obi-wan himself was corrupted by his own anger. This is important in context to the fourth movie, because after years of meditation and reflection he is no longer angry with Anakin. He accepts his fate and only then becomes one with the Force. #YesI'maliterarynerd

[Samuraikoku]

Hey, its only Germany's opinion after all.

The opinion of a Lithuanian living in Germany. I'm sensing I'm going to have to go through the trouble of searching Lithuania's law on sexual offences.

Edit: I cannot fucking read Lithuanian.

Lithuania

The age of consent in Lithuania is 16, as specified by the Lithuanian Criminal Code §151.1, introduced by the bill of 2 July 2010.

Previously the age of consent was set to 14 according to the Lithuanian Criminal Code §153 prohibiting any sexual molestation or sexual relationships with a minor under 14 years. The age of consent (14) was not set directly in this article of the Lithuanian criminal code, though. It has been established by the Lithuanian case law. This meant that both heterosexual and homosexual acts were allowed once a child had reached the age of 14. There was (and remains) an exception to this rule: §151.1(3) of the Lithuanian Criminal Code prohibits parents, guardians, or other people who are ex officio directly responsible for the upbringing and supervision of a child to have any relationships of sexual kind with the child, if he or she has not yet reached the age of 18.

History

Until 1993, male homosexual acts were prohibited under the Lithuanian Criminal Code, Article 1221, which was repealed in that year. The new law set an age of consent of 17 for male oral and anal intercourse, 16 for other male homosexual acts, and 14 for lesbian and heterosexual acts. In 2004, the law was amended to equalise the age of consent at 14 for all sexual acts; the age of consent was raised to 16 in 2010, regardless of gender and sexual orientation.[33]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Lithuania

[Anachronous Rex]

do you still live with your mother?

I have no choice but to return to my house over breaks, I have no money to move out.

I'm so sorry Indi...

[Seperates]

That is not understanding. That is laughing at someone because they are angry, thus provoking more anger. This is not a rational, nor reasoned approach if the goal is to reach an understanding.

Frankly I have absolutely no desire to reach an understanding with him. The fact he lacks everything from basic empathy to basic intelligence is not my problem.

I wish it was, because that way I could deal with it in person and no one else would have to.

You don't have to be. He is the one that is claiming to be perfectly rational and reasonable. You have not made such a claim, therefore there is no reason to dispute it.

[Delmonte]

Well, while I was still in denial of my gayness this girl and I would have sex at Speech tournaments when our schools stayed in the same hotel. (I even figured out how to get past the ol' tape on the doors trick) And she wanted sex as a rule. And I knew when she had an orgasm or not because she'd fucking tell me. Sometimes she wouldn't really get anything and would just be like "It's fine, let's just stop." even if I was prepared to continue until she had her moment. Other times I would think she was finished and she would inform me otherwise and tell me to get back to my battle stations, as it were. I highly doubt she faked it either way as she didn't seem to be afraid of what I thought at the time and, like I said, I got plenty of both results. And we were both intelligent and capable of behaving like adults and I had a lot of respect for her then and still do now.

However, I do think that there's legitimacy to some of this. We really have no way of knowing, but I would totally believe that girls are just "less horny" than guys. I have refused sex with my boyfriend twice; once because of nausea and again because my knee really really hurt. He has refused once because of nausea (he caught what I had from me). According to my straight friends, their girlfriends will refuse sex all the time. But then again, I also have a straight female friend who says she'll suggest sex when she doesn't feel like it or even when she knows it might cause her pain. Still haven't figured that one out. So I guess the moral of the story is that you should be gay because sex is easier to come by and you get to ramble on NationStates.

EDIT: Purple curtains and lawn flamingoes not included.

[South Kebabistan]

Rapists and people who have nothing against rape should not be allowed in normal society. Put the in jail, kill them, ship them to Antarctica. Just get rid of them.
Of course the problem with this is that chances are you don't realise someone's a rapist until it's too late. But if we could get it to work it would also decrease the amount of false rape claims, or at least the percentage of which that are believed.

Manipulating and using persuasive techniques to get sex with people who wouldn't otherwise want it is still rape, in most circumstances, in my opinion. However, if you are drunk, have sex at a party and then regret it in the morning, it's you're fault, don't blame the bloke. This feminist buzzword 'rape culture' is a load of made up nonsense though, just like the whole idea of the 'patriarchy'.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Rapists and people who have nothing against rape should not be allowed in normal society. Put the in jail, kill them, ship them to Antarctica. Just get rid of them.
Of course the problem with this is that chances are you don't realise someone's a rapist until it's too late. But if we could get it to work it would also decrease the amount of false rape claims, or at least the percentage of which that are believed.

Manipulating and using persuasive techniques to get sex with people who wouldn't otherwise want it is still rape, in most circumstances, in my opinion. However, if you are drunk, have sex at a party and then regret it in the morning, it's you're fault, don't blame the bloke. This feminist buzzword 'rape culture' is a load of made up nonsense though, just like the whole idea of the 'patriarchy'.

You can literally scroll up and find perfect examples of their existence.

[Ashmoria]

do you still live with your mother?

I have no choice but to return to my house over breaks, I have no money to move out.

I suppose it gives you a chance to keep an eye on your brother...

its best not to try to get person on the internet who isn't interested in real debate to understand your background. they are playing a game, you aren't.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Rapists and people who have nothing against rape should not be allowed in normal society. Put the in jail, kill them, ship them to Antarctica. Just get rid of them.
Of course the problem with this is that chances are you don't realise someone's a rapist until it's too late. But if we could get it to work it would also decrease the amount of false rape claims, or at least the percentage of which that are believed.

Manipulating and using persuasive techniques to get sex with people who wouldn't otherwise want it is still rape, in most circumstances, in my opinion.

This was more or less OK, and fairly sensible. But then...

However, if you are drunk, have sex at a party and then regret it in the morning, it's you're fault, don't blame the bloke.

You're wrong. You can't give consent when drunk.

This feminist buzzword 'rape culture' is a load of made up nonsense though,

The media around Steubenville with their mourning the rapists would suggest otherwise.

just like the whole idea of the 'patriarchy'.

Patriarchy exists. It harms men as much as women.

[Ljvonia]

I think you must have missed the bit where the person trained in law quoted German rape and consent law very extensively.

Extensively? That's one penal figure in a whole damn chapter.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN
OFFENCES AGAINST SEXUAL SELF-DETERMINATION
Section 174 Abuse of position of trust
Section 174a Sexual abuse of prisoners, patients and institutionalised persons
Section 174b Abuse of official position
Section 174c Abuse of a relationship of counselling, treatment or care
Section 175 (repealed)
Section 176 Child abuse
Section 176a Aggravated child abuse
Section 176b Child abuse causing death
Section 177 Sexual assault by use of force or threats; rape
Section 178 Sexual assault by use of force or threat of force and rape causing death
Section 179 Abuse of persons who are incapable of resistance
Section 180 Causing minors to engage in sexual activity
Section 180a Exploitation of prostitutes
Section 180b and section 181 (repealed)
Section 181a Controlling prostitution
Section 181b Supervision order
Section 181c Confiscatory expropriation and extended confiscation
Section 182 Abuse of juveniles
Section 183 Exhibitionism
Section 183a Causing a public disturbance
Section 184 Distribution of pornography
Section 184a Distribution of pornography depicting violence or sodomy
Section 184b Distribution, acquisition and possession of child pornography
Section 184c Distribution, acquisition and possession of juvenile pornography
Section 184d Distribution of pornographic performances by broadcasting, media services or telecommunications services
Section 184e Unlawful prostitution
Section 184f Prostitution likely to corrupt juveniles
Section 184g Definitions

Oh, nice! That's excellent, let's have a look at Section 177 then, shall we? I added a bit of formatting (only bolding and underlining)

Section 177
Sexual assault by use of force or threats; rape

(1) Whosoever coerces another person
1. by force;
2. by threat of imminent danger to life or limb; or
3. by exploiting a situation in which the victim is unprotected and at the mercy of the offender,
to suffer sexual acts by the offender or a third person on their own person or to engage actively in sexual activity with the offender or a third person, shall be liable to imprisonment of not less than one year.
(2) In especially serious cases the penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than two years. An especially serious case typically occurs if
1. the offender performs sexual intercourse with the victim or performs similar sexual acts with the victim, or allows them to be performed on himself by the victim, especially if they degrade the victim or if they entail penetration of the body (rape); or
2. the offence is committed jointly by more than one person.
(3) The penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than three years if the offender
1. carries a weapon or another dangerous instrument;
2. otherwise carries an instrument or other means for the purpose of preventing or overcoming the resistance of another person through force or threat of force; or
3. by the offence places the victim in danger of serious injury.
(4) The penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than five years if
1. the offender uses a weapon or another dangerous instrument during the commission of the offence; or if
2. the offender
(a) seriously physically abuses the victim during the offence; or
(b) by the offence places the victim in danger of death.
(5) In less serious cases under subsection (1) above the penalty shall be imprisonment from six months to five years, in less serious cases under subsections (3) and (4) above imprisonment from one to ten years.

Subsection one is excellent and I am in aggreeance with it: force, threat of force and exploitation of helplessness (unconsciousness). So far so good.
Subsection two - also good. Especially degrading acts mandate harsher punishment, I concur.
Subsection three - different rules for armed thread or serious threat to life and limb - I concur once more.
Subsection four: danger of death, one step above subsection three. A bit legalese for me, but alright.
Subsection 5 manages overall punishment and jail times.

Section 179
Abuse of persons who are incapable of resistance

(1) Whosoever abuses another person who is incapable of resistance
1. because of a mental illness or disability including an addiction or because of a profound consciousness disorder; or
2. is physically incapable,and by exploiting the incapability to resist engages in sexual activity with the person or allows them actively to engage in sexual activity on his person shall be liable to imprisonment from six months to ten years.

(2) Whosoever abuses a person incapable of resistance (subsection (1) above), by inducing the person, under exploitation of the incapability of resistance, to engage actively in sexual activity with a third person or to allow a third person to engage in sexual activity with them, shall incur the same penalty.

(3) In especially serious cases the penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than one year.

(4) The attempt shall be punishable.

(5) The penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than two years if
1. the offender performs sexual intercourse or similar sexual acts with the victim which include penetration of the body, or allows them to be committed on himself by the victim;
2. the offence is committed jointly by more than one person; or
3. by the offence the offender places the victim in danger of serious injury or substantial impairment of his physical or emotional development.

(5) In less serious cases under subsection (5) above the penalty shall be imprisonment from one to ten years.

(6) Section 177(4) No 2 and section 178 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

That one does not directly concern rape, but I found it fitting nevertheless.

So, dear people who called me a rape apologist and lots of other funny names. Where exactly does this govern how consent is defined? Show me where this law agrees with you, go ahead.

[Individuality-ness]

I have no choice but to return to my house over breaks, I have no money to move out.

I'm so sorry Indi...

It's okay. She works now, she's not in the house most of the time. I live.

[Choronzon]

Extensively? That's one penal figure in a whole damn chapter.

Oh, nice! That's excellent, let's have a look at Section 177 then, shall we? I added a bit of formatting (only bolding and underlining)

Section 177
Sexual assault by use of force or threats; rape

(1) Whosoever coerces another person
1. by force;
2. by threat of imminent danger to life or limb; or
3. by exploiting a situation in which the victim is unprotected and at the mercy of the offender,
to suffer sexual acts by the offender or a third person on their own person or to engage actively in sexual activity with the offender or a third person, shall be liable to imprisonment of not less than one year.
(2) In especially serious cases the penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than two years. An especially serious case typically occurs if
1. the offender performs sexual intercourse with the victim or performs similar sexual acts with the victim, or allows them to be performed on himself by the victim, especially if they degrade the victim or if they entail penetration of the body (rape); or
2. the offence is committed jointly by more than one person.
(3) The penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than three years if the offender
1. carries a weapon or another dangerous instrument;
2. otherwise carries an instrument or other means for the purpose of preventing or overcoming the resistance of another person through force or threat of force; or
3. by the offence places the victim in danger of serious injury.
(4) The penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than five years if
1. the offender uses a weapon or another dangerous instrument during the commission of the offence; or if
2. the offender
(a) seriously physically abuses the victim during the offence; or
(b) by the offence places the victim in danger of death.
(5) In less serious cases under subsection (1) above the penalty shall be imprisonment from six months to five years, in less serious cases under subsections (3) and (4) above imprisonment from one to ten years.

Subsection one is excellent and I am in aggreeance with it: force, threat of force and exploitation of helplessness (unconsciousness). So far so good.
Subsection two - also good. Especially degrading acts mandate harsher punishment, I concur.
Subsection three - different rules for armed thread or serious threat to life and limb - I concur once more.
Subsection four: danger of death, one step above subsection three. A bit legalese for me, but alright.
Subsection 5 manages overall punishment and jail times.

Section 179
Abuse of persons who are incapable of resistance

(1) Whosoever abuses another person who is incapable of resistance
1. because of a mental illness or disability including an addiction or because of a profound consciousness disorder; or
2. is physically incapable,and by exploiting the incapability to resist engages in sexual activity with the person or allows them actively to engage in sexual activity on his person shall be liable to imprisonment from six months to ten years.

(2) Whosoever abuses a person incapable of resistance (subsection (1) above), by inducing the person, under exploitation of the incapability of resistance, to engage actively in sexual activity with a third person or to allow a third person to engage in sexual activity with them, shall incur the same penalty.

(3) In especially serious cases the penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than one year.

(4) The attempt shall be punishable.

(5) The penalty shall be imprisonment of not less than two years if
1. the offender performs sexual intercourse or similar sexual acts with the victim which include penetration of the body, or allows them to be committed on himself by the victim;
2. the offence is committed jointly by more than one person; or
3. by the offence the offender places the victim in danger of serious injury or substantial impairment of his physical or emotional development.

(5) In less serious cases under subsection (5) above the penalty shall be imprisonment from one to ten years.

(6) Section 177(4) No 2 and section 178 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

That one does not directly concern rape, but I found it fitting nevertheless.

So, dear people who called me a rape apologist and lots of other funny names. Where exactly does this govern how consent is defined? Show me where this law agrees with you, go ahead.

Holy Christ. Consent is literally defined. Right the fuck there. The whole thing is defining consent.

Why are you reading the law anyway man? Its just an opinion.

[Individuality-ness]

I have no choice but to return to my house over breaks, I have no money to move out.

I suppose it gives you a chance to keep an eye on your brother...

its best not to try to get person on the internet who isn't interested in real debate to understand your background. they are playing a game, you aren't.

Very true. I'm not scared to say it anymore.

[Ashmoria]

I suppose it gives you a chance to keep an eye on your brother...

its best not to try to get person on the internet who isn't interested in real debate to understand your background. they are playing a game, you aren't.

Very true. I'm not scared to say it anymore.

its a first step, eh? being able to tell the truth. its a long road to building a good life for yourself but it can be done.

[Seperates]

However, if you are drunk, have sex at a party and then regret it in the morning, it's you're fault, don't blame the bloke. This feminist buzzword 'rape culture' is a load of made up nonsense though, just like the whole idea of the 'patriarchy'.

First of all it is rape to have sex with someone while they are intoxicated. However, I'm not going to deal with that right now.

That is rape culture. The assumption that the female is responsible in context of drunken encounters. The idea that the man has no resposibility in the matter. Either both parties are responsible, or niether are responsible in the case of equal intoxication.

It's like a fish asserting it doesn't live in water.

[Delmonte]

Rapists and people who have nothing against rape should not be allowed in normal society. Put the in jail, kill them, ship them to Antarctica. Just get rid of them.
Of course the problem with this is that chances are you don't realise someone's a rapist until it's too late. But if we could get it to work it would also decrease the amount of false rape claims, or at least the percentage of which that are believed.

Manipulating and using persuasive techniques to get sex with people who wouldn't otherwise want it is still rape, in most circumstances, in my opinion. However, if you are drunk, have sex at a party and then regret it in the morning, it's you're fault, don't blame the bloke. This feminist buzzword 'rape culture' is a load of made up nonsense though, just like the whole idea of the 'patriarchy'.

You can literally scroll up and find perfect examples of their existence.

Hm. This is an issue that my thoughts have changed on several times. Genders were more or less equal for the most part simply with different social expectations. I read a book by some professor with degrees out the wazoo who argued that this was because men originally had a surplus of production (we're naturally stronger than females) and a deficit of reproduction (we cannot carry children or feed them naturally) while females had a surplus of reproduction (they can have children and feed them through natural means) and a deficit of production (they do not have an affinity towards raw strength and are incapable of work for like six or seven months when they're bearing children while men can do what they need to do to make kids and get back to work). So over the milennia men have gotten really really good at things that are labor intensive while women have become useless at those things and have become very good at raising children and doing work that is helpful and can be performed while pregnant (like basket weaving and what-not, then sewing and what-have-you).

I do not buy the feminist argument that women have spent their entire existence under the yoke of men. Up until like eighty years ago in America your sentence for a crime was doubled if you committed it against a woman and cursing in the presence of a lady was a criminal offense in many states up until the eighties. There were different expectations, yes, and gender roles were a bit one-sided until recently, but with social restrictions also came expectations that women would be provided a certain special protection from the harsh realities of life. As misguided as that is, it was an attempt at some form of equality.

[Samuraikoku]

Holy Christ. Consent is literally defined. Right the fuck there. The whole thing is defining consent.

Why are you reading the law anyway man? Its just an opinion.

I assume he missed the "coercion", "threat", "force", "exploiting situation", "unprotected mercy", and "incapable of resistance". Or ignored them outright.