Apparently, Rape is not Rape

[Kyronea]

You know, I've been reading through this thread, and I still don't get how someone can defend continuing to have sex with someone who passes out.

Here's a hint, people: if someone passes out during sex, that means SOMETHING IS WRONG. If nothing else that should compell you to stop your fucking them and look for help.

And even if nothing is wrong, unless said person has specifically stated that they are perfectly okay with you continuing to fuck them while they're unconscious, consent is automatically revoked.

This applies to both men and women. People are people. As has been stated previously, they exist in a state of automatic lack of consent until they give consent. If something causes them to stop being able to give consent, they are therefore automatically NOT CONSENTING ANYMORE.

I can't tell you how angry I'd be with my partner if they continued having sex with me while I was unconscious. Not only would that show a blatant disregard for my health and well-being, but it would be stepping far over a boundary they should not be crossing.

Seriously, this is beyond frat boys and what other specific scenarios you want to invoke. This applies to everything. Unless someone has given consent, they are not consenting. If someone has gone into a state where they are no longer capable of giving consent, they have stopped consenting even if they previously gave it before entering that state. End of discussion. There is no grey area here. It's clear as crystal as that.

[Bottle]

Let's try an even more simple approach.

Let's say you're drinking with your roommate, and playing Super Smash Brothers.

Let's say your roommate has a few too many, and passes out after one match.

Let's say you decide you want to keep playing Super Smash Brothers. Now, would you try to claim that you were "playing videogames with your roommate" after he passed out? Would you actually try to claim that you were playing a match against your unconscious buddy? If somebody walked in and saw you playing Smash Brothers while your roommate was passed out next to you on the couch, do you really think they'd believe you if you claimed that the two of you were playing a match together?

So...why the fuck would anybody try to claim that they're "having sex with" somebody who is unconscious? You're not doing anything WITH anybody. You're masturbating using the body of an unconscious person. Trying to claim that you were "having sex with" a girl after she passed out is as pathetic as trying to claim that you had an epic Smash Brothers battle with your unconscious roommate. Of course, in the case of fucking somebody's unconscious body, you're also violating somebody and potentially injuring them physically, in addition to being a loser creep.

[Dyakovo]

That would only make frat boys horny, you're an educated woman, you know how they tend to be the scum of the earth.

No we are not.

I said tend to be, lots of them are. Where I went to school the Frat boys did everything but peddle coke, and they got away with it because they were 'only kids having fun' I didn't say Greed and Death is.

What about the rest of my fraternity?

Odds are in favor of them being scumbags...
Especially considering your "funny" story you shared in the Greek thread...

[Poliwanacraca]

Let's try an even more simple approach.

Let's say you're drinking with your roommate, and playing Super Smash Brothers.

Let's say your roommate has a few too many, and passes out after one match.

Let's say you decide you want to keep playing Super Smash Brothers. Now, would you try to claim that you were "playing videogames with your roommate" after he passed out? Would you actually try to claim that you were playing a match against your unconscious buddy? If somebody walked in and saw you playing Smash Brothers while your roommate was passed out next to you on the couch, do you really think they'd believe you if you claimed that the two of you were playing a match together?

So...why the fuck would anybody try to claim that they're "having sex with" somebody who is unconscious? You're not doing anything WITH anybody. You're masturbating using the body of an unconscious person. Trying to claim that you were "having sex with" a girl after she passed out is as pathetic as trying to claim that you had an epic Smash Brothers battle with your unconscious roommate. Of course, in the case of fucking somebody's unconscious body, you're also violating somebody and potentially injuring them physically, in addition to being a loser creep.

Well said.

[Bottle]

Well said.

Yet we're in a thread full of guys who are doing the equivalent of putting the controller in their unconscious roommate's hand and then expecting all of us to agree that they're totally playing a match together, because Roomie was the one who originally powered up the Wii before he passed out.

Or at least we should agree that it's a VERY confusing and complex issue, one that intelligent people can disagree about. After all, plenty of intelligent and articulate people would argue that since your roommate consented to play videogames with you before losing consciousness, the subsequent games you played against his inert avatar are totally valid.

[Greed and Death]

Let's try an even more simple approach.

Let's say you're drinking with your roommate, and playing Super Smash Brothers.

Let's say your roommate has a few too many, and passes out after one match.

Let's say you decide you want to keep playing Super Smash Brothers. Now, would you try to claim that you were "playing videogames with your roommate" after he passed out? Would you actually try to claim that you were playing a match against your unconscious buddy? If somebody walked in and saw you playing Smash Brothers while your roommate was passed out next to you on the couch, do you really think they'd believe you if you claimed that the two of you were playing a match together?

So...why the fuck would anybody try to claim that they're "having sex with" somebody who is unconscious? You're not doing anything WITH anybody. You're masturbating using the body of an unconscious person. Trying to claim that you were "having sex with" a girl after she passed out is as pathetic as trying to claim that you had an epic Smash Brothers battle with your unconscious roommate. Of course, in the case of fucking somebody's unconscious body, you're also violating somebody and potentially injuring them physically, in addition to being a loser creep.

I would finish the match at hand he passed out during. Then claim victory, and get a permanent marker.

[Kyronea]

I see we've abandoned the pretense of educated discussion.

What do you mean? I personally think that, NS roleplaying aside, the idea of a safe word being agreed to by all couples regardless of whether they engage in BDSM activities or not is an incredibly good one, because while the case of someone passing out might be clear cut, other cases might not be so. In sex, one can become very impassioned. Since, as Neo says, many phrases can become confused or muddled, having something clear and precise is a great idea.

[Poliwanacraca]

Well said.

Yet we're in a thread full of guys who are doing the equivalent of putting the controller in their unconscious roommate's hand and then expecting all of us to agree that they're totally playing a match together because Roomie was the one who originally powered up the Wii.


Or, if not agree, then at least agree that it's a VERY confusing and complex issue, one that intelligent people can disagree about. After all, plenty of intelligent and articulate people would argue that since your roommate consented to play videogames with you before losing consciousness, the subsequent games you played against his inert avatar are totally valid.

I sometimes wonder if many of those guys are just deeply worried that they will never be able to win a game of Super Smash Brothers against a fully-functioning opponent, so to speak.

And, to give credit to some of the sensible guys in this thread, I'm okay with questioning whether you could still reasonably think you were playing with your roommate during the two or three seconds between him passing out and you noticing that Mario was just standing there letting Kirby swallow him. That's fair enough. I just really don't get the whole, "Look, he started the game, so the fact that Kirby swallowed Mario 400 times in succession still totally counts" argument.

[Poliwanacraca]

I see we've abandoned the pretense of educated discussion.

What do you mean? I personally think that, NS roleplaying aside, the idea of a safe word being agreed to by all couples regardless of whether they engage in BDSM activities or not is an incredibly good one, because while the case of someone passing out might be clear cut, other cases might not be so. In sex, one can become very impassioned. Since, as Neo says, many phrases can become confused or muddled, having something clear and precise is a great idea.

1. ....did you not see what the proposed "safeword" was?

2. Unless you have previously established otherwise, "no" and "stop" fucking well mean "no" and "stop." That is perfectly clear and precise.

[Kyronea]

1. ....did you not see what the proposed "safeword" was?

It was nonsense. That was beside the point, as my argument isn't whether the specifics of his proposed idea are valid, but whether the idea in general of a safe word for couples is valid.

2. Unless you have previously established otherwise, "no" and "stop" fucking well mean "no" and "stop." That is perfectly clear and precise.

Oh, I agree completely.

But, I'm just arguing that for those who seem to have it in their heads that things are more "complicated" than that, to make them feel better they could come up with a safe word. To make it clear to them, I mean.

[Dempublicents1]

I see we've abandoned the pretense of educated discussion.

What do you mean? I personally think that, NS roleplaying aside, the idea of a safe word being agreed to by all couples regardless of whether they engage in BDSM activities or not is an incredibly good one, because while the case of someone passing out might be clear cut, other cases might not be so. In sex, one can become very impassioned. Since, as Neo says, many phrases can become confused or muddled, having something clear and precise is a great idea.

1. ....did you not see what the proposed "safeword" was?

2. Unless you have previously established otherwise, "no" and "stop" fucking well mean "no" and "stop." That is perfectly clear and precise.

There are some things that can happen even during vanilla sex, though. "Don't stop" can come out rather strained so that all the person really hears is "Don't" or "stop" and then they stop anyways and it's sad.

Now, I don't think that type of thing is enough of an issue to need a safe word, but if it really bugs someone, I suppose they could institute a safe-word instead.

[Neo Art]

Still trying to figure out why the fuck the vast bulk of couples would "need" a safeword.

[Poliwanacraca]

There are some things that can happen even during vanilla sex, though. "Don't stop" can come out rather strained so that all the person really hears is "Don't" or "stop" and then they stop anyways and it's sad.

Now, I don't think that type of thing is enough of an issue to need a safe word, but if it really bugs someone, I suppose they could institute a safe-word instead.

Oh, sure, and if it bugs a particular couple, that's obviously fine. I just think it's not really necessary to have a predetermined safeword unless you particularly plan on saying "no" when you don't mean it. It's not as if it's a horrific tragedy if "don't stop" turns into "don't! stop!", Partner A stops, Partner B says, "no no, I meant DON'T stop," and Partner A resumes. It is, at worst, kinda frustrating.

I just always get worried when people start down the path of presuming that "no" might not really mean "no." If your partner has said as much, then fine, great, that's your personal thing, and there's nothing wrong with that, but the default assumption among all couples, kinky, vanilla, straight, gay, whatever, should be that "no" fucking well MEANS "no."

[Kyronea]

Alright then. I apologize for the bad idea.

[Neo Art]

There are some things that can happen even during vanilla sex, though. "Don't stop" can come out rather strained so that all the person really hears is "Don't" or "stop" and then they stop anyways and it's sad.

Now, I don't think that type of thing is enough of an issue to need a safe word, but if it really bugs someone, I suppose they could institute a safe-word instead.

Oh, sure, and if it bugs a particular couple, that's obviously fine. I just think it's not really necessary to have a predetermined safeword unless you particularly plan on saying "no" when you don't mean it. It's not as if it's a horrific tragedy if "don't stop" turns into "don't! stop!", Partner A stops, Partner B says, "no no, I meant DON'T stop," and Partner A resumes. It is, at worst, kinda frustrating.

That's sorta my point. I mean, in a, let's call it "vanilla" relationship, how often does the word "no" or "stop" get said unless they mean explicitly that?

[Poliwanacraca]

1. ....did you not see what the proposed "safeword" was?

It was nonsense. That was beside the point, as my argument isn't whether the specifics of his proposed idea are valid, but whether the idea in general of a safe word for couples is valid.

2. Unless you have previously established otherwise, "no" and "stop" fucking well mean "no" and "stop." That is perfectly clear and precise.

Oh, I agree completely.

But, I'm just arguing that for those who seem to have it in their heads that things are more "complicated" than that, to make them feel better they could come up with a safe word. To make it clear to them, I mean.

I see no reason why such idiots would find "red" or "safeword" or "banana" any less confusing or complicated than "stop," since the point of a safeword is just "here is a word that means 'stop.'"

[Neo Art]

Alright then. I apologize for the bad idea.

Oh for the love of...

[Greed and Death]

Still trying to figure out why the fuck the vast bulk of couples would "need" a safeword.

well sometimes when the pleasure involves certain levels of pain/pleasure the mind reactivity shouts no.
It is not meant and the couple should have agreed to continue before hand. but you need to be able to use a safe word in case something is injuring you.

[Kyronea]

Oh for the love of...

Poli has stated it's essentially a bad idea. I recognize that and am stopping my argument, because it is a bad idea, because as she said, it starts down the path of no not actually meaning no, when that's not a path most people would necessarily be taking.

[Poliwanacraca]

There are some things that can happen even during vanilla sex, though. "Don't stop" can come out rather strained so that all the person really hears is "Don't" or "stop" and then they stop anyways and it's sad.

Now, I don't think that type of thing is enough of an issue to need a safe word, but if it really bugs someone, I suppose they could institute a safe-word instead.

Oh, sure, and if it bugs a particular couple, that's obviously fine. I just think it's not really necessary to have a predetermined safeword unless you particularly plan on saying "no" when you don't mean it. It's not as if it's a horrific tragedy if "don't stop" turns into "don't! stop!", Partner A stops, Partner B says, "no no, I meant DON'T stop," and Partner A resumes. It is, at worst, kinda frustrating.

That's sorta my point. I mean, in a, let's call it "vanilla" relationship, how often does the word "no" or "stop" get said unless they mean explicitly that?

Heck, I don't think they even get used to mean anything else terribly often in your average BDSM relationship. I'm pretty darn kinky, after all, and I've never once used "stop" to mean anything but "stop."

[Greed and Death]

Oh, sure, and if it bugs a particular couple, that's obviously fine. I just think it's not really necessary to have a predetermined safeword unless you particularly plan on saying "no" when you don't mean it. It's not as if it's a horrific tragedy if "don't stop" turns into "don't! stop!", Partner A stops, Partner B says, "no no, I meant DON'T stop," and Partner A resumes. It is, at worst, kinda frustrating.

That's sorta my point. I mean, in a, let's call it "vanilla" relationship, how often does the word "no" or "stop" get said unless they mean explicitly that?

Who is in a Vanilla relationship after a month or two anyways ??

[Kyronea]

Alright then. I apologize for the bad idea.

Oh for the love of...

Although I am now actually rather confused as to why you are having this reaction. Your statement prior to this suggested to me that you thought my argument was a rather bad idea. If it's not, then why did you say what you said?

[Poliwanacraca]

Alright then. I apologize for the bad idea.

Oh for the love of...

Although I am now actually rather confused as to why you are having this reaction. Your statement prior to this suggested to me that you thought my argument was a rather bad idea. If it's not, then why did you say what you said?

I don't think you really needed to apologize.

[Neo Art]

Heck, I don't think they even get used to mean anything else terribly often in your average BDSM relationship. I'm pretty darn kinky, after all, and I've never once used "stop" to mean anything but "stop."

true, but stop can be "stop right now I'm not comfortable or "stop, because if you don't I'm going to c...." erm, nevermind.

And in seriousness, I don't use safewords. Never have. I believe in covering my own ass.

[Kyronea]

I don't think you really needed to apologize.

Why not? It was a mistake. I'm recognizing that I made a mistake and that I'm correcting it. Thus, apologizing.