"Women want sex, just not with YOU."

[Samuraikoku]

What was it that was to prove then?

Bullshit, methinks. Stop trying to force your opinion into the rest of the world.

Turns out your homeland and the country you live in agree with America and Argentina.

[Seperates]

It's easier to express it as 'Have sex with only those who have expressed the desire to have sex in an un-enbriated, or otherwse non-threatened enviorment.'

That I consider false: it is easier to have sex with those who do not object to it.

...also un-inebriated? Good one.

Then you are wrong. Just because there is no verbal expression of displeasure doesn't mean there is no objection.

And that is the legal definition. So fucking deal with it.

And a non-threatening enviorment means that you are not threatening to bash their head in with a rock or kill their family if they do not have sex with you. Or a non-verbal threat of firing if you are their boss.

[Choronzon]

What was it that was to prove then?

Bullshit, methinks. Stop trying to force your opinion into the rest of the world.

Turns out your homeland and the country you live in agree with America and Argentina.

Its almost like hes really bad at this.

[Samuraikoku]

You'll forgive me if your "experiences" are not a trustworthy source. I'd like to know what expertise you have in the field of child psychology that justifies this claim.

All that time as a biology professor.

In Todd Akin University.

[Choronzon]

And that is the legal definition. So fucking deal with it.

But its just an opiniooooooooonnnnnnnnn!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Ljvonia]

That I consider false: it is easier to have sex with those who do not object to it.

Tell me, why do women's bodies exist in a state of default consent?

Tell me: Why is it so hard to utter a monosyllabic "no"?

[Choronzon]

All that time as a biology professor.

In Todd Akin University.

[Choronzon]

Tell me, why do women's bodies exist in a state of default consent?

Tell me: Why is it so hard to utter a monosyllabic "no"?

Answer my question.

[Delmonte]

I do not buy the feminist argument that women have spent their entire lives under the yoke of men.

Then you're wrong.

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.

Because women are dainty creatures and can't handle as much as big strong men. No sexism there!

But I mean you're right. Its not like we ever denied women the right to vote or anything like that. Nope, truly women have never been oppressed.

Women were prevented from voting during the nineteenth century because it was common knowledge that the top item on their list was the illegalization of liquor. It's no coincidence that congress passed prohibition right before giving women the vote: They wanted to remain in office. So yeah, maybe if women hadn't been in favor of violating rights so much their rights wouldn't have been violated so much

[Aghny]

She was old enough to have her period. From my experiences, that is old enough to be able to "tell the truth about parental abuse"

You'll forgive me if your "experiences" are not a trustworthy source. I'd like to know what expertise you have in the field of child psychology that justifies this claim.

The average age of first menstruation is 12, but can begin much sooner. So apparently ~12 year olds should fend for themselves? That's just lovely.

As a professor, there was a compulsory class on psychology in general for my degrees.

As for fending for themselves, quote me saying that and i will give you a cookie.

[Choronzon]

Then you're wrong.

Because women are dainty creatures and can't handle as much as big strong men. No sexism there!

But I mean you're right. Its not like we ever denied women the right to vote or anything like that. Nope, truly women have never been oppressed.

Women were prevented from voting during the nineteenth century because it was common knowledge that the top item on their list was the illegalization of liquor. It's no coincidence that congress passed prohibition right before giving women the vote: They wanted to remain in office. So yeah, maybe if women hadn't been in favor of violating rights so much their rights wouldn't have been violated so much

I'm just going to pretend this was a joke.

[Choronzon]

[
As a professor, there was a compulsory class on psychology in general for my degrees.

No one believes you. Answer his question properly.

EDIT: Even if I believed you, and I don't, one intro class doesn't make you an expert.

Otherwise I am an expert on a vast, vast number of things.

[Samuraikoku]

Tell me: Why is it so hard to utter a monosyllabic "no"?

Because you don't go around assuming people say yes to anything. Because you are supposed to have the average modicum of intelligence and civility to know the people around you may not want you to do anything to them.

[Seperates]

Tell me, why do women's bodies exist in a state of default consent?

Tell me: Why is it so hard to utter a monosyllabic "no"?

Why should they have to?

[Choronzon]

Tell me: Why is it so hard to utter a monosyllabic "no"?

Because you don't go around assuming people say yes to anything. Because you are supposed to have the average modicum of intelligence and civility to know the people around you may not want you to do anything to them.

Do not answer his question until he answers mine. Do not give him more opportunities to dodge.

[Aghny]

That I consider false: it is easier to have sex with those who do not object to it.

...also un-inebriated? Good one.

Then you are wrong. Just because there is no verbal expression of displeasure doesn't mean there is no objection.

And that is the legal definition. So fucking deal with it.

And a non-threatening enviorment means that you are not threatening to bash their head in with a rock or kill their family if they do not have sex with you. Or a non-verbal threat of firing if you are their boss.

Yet if you can't prove such an objection happened, it won't hold in the court of law.

[Samuraikoku]

As a professor, there was a compulsory class on psychology in general for my degrees.

As for fending for themselves, quote me saying that and i will give you a cookie.

But as for the rest of it, your only fault is that you didn't take any action against it. You also admitted to lying to the authorities. So you had a chance to make it stop, yet you didn't.

Make it Oreos, please.

[Choronzon]

That I consider false: it is easier to have sex with those who do not object to it.

Tell me, why do women's bodies exist in a state of default consent?

Still waiting.

[Ljvonia]

So you're not able to see "consent" in "against their will"?

To me "Consenting" means: openly demonstrating, be it verbal or otherwise, ones willingness and agreement. One does consent, active verb... one is willing, passive verb structure. In the converse argument this means: consent must be stated, willingness can be assumed given a fitting situation. If you will what I assume of all women who enter my bedroom is the latter.

[Choronzon]

Then you are wrong. Just because there is no verbal expression of displeasure doesn't mean there is no objection.

And that is the legal definition. So fucking deal with it.

And a non-threatening enviorment means that you are not threatening to bash their head in with a rock or kill their family if they do not have sex with you. Or a non-verbal threat of firing if you are their boss.

Yet if you can't prove such an objection happened, it won't hold in the court of law.

And yet, people manage to prove it all the time.

[Aghny]

Tell me: Why is it so hard to utter a monosyllabic "no"?

Why should they have to?

Because if they don't, it is an "yes".

[Choronzon]

So you're not able to see "consent" in "against their will"?

To me "Consenting" means: openly demonstrating, be it verbal or otherwise, ones willingness and agreement. One does consent, active verb... one is willing, passive verb structure. In the converse argument this means: consent must be stated, willingness can be assumed given a fitting situation. If you will what I assume of all women who enter my bedroom is the latter.

No one gives a shit what it means to you. We're talking about the law.

[Aghny]

Yet if you can't prove such an objection happened, it won't hold in the court of law.

And yet, people manage to prove it all the time.

Nope.gif

[Samuraikoku]

Because if they don't, it is an "yes".

Law says otherwise.

[Choronzon]

Why should they have to?

Because if they don't, it is an "yes".

Why do women's bodies exist in a state of default consent?

You have not explicitly told me I cannot harvest your organs. Therefore I can only assume you consent to me harvesting your organs. Now breathe deeply into this cloth....