The NationStates Feminist Thread II

[Chessmistress]

You're assuming bad faith in all males who rape.
I'm aware it's not so.

"Did you say yes?" "No."
"Did she say yes?" "No, but I'm sure she consented because..."

That's the matter.

Because rape is just a misunderstanding right? I can't believe the MRA types on this site keep falling for your faux feminism. No feminist would make the argument that rapists do not act in bad faith. I can't imagine a feminist making the argument you are making right now.

Sorry, I don't hate men.
I'm sure there are the jerks, ignorants, within the campuses, who thinks, in good faith, they have sex with a drunk woman and they're instead raping her.
That's why it should be VERBALLY expressed and it should be VERY clear that drunk sex is always rape.
Real Feminists pushed for VERBAL consent, not for this mess.

[Val Halla]

Do you like, understand how relationships work? If you say no, that means no. Generally, it's pretty easy to tell if someone consents

Obviously in the case of an abusive relationship... Well, it's abusive, so I think that might be the only case your idea would have logic. But even then, yknow, it's abusive, so like, I don't think you really can consent at all

I probably worded that poorly but if someone wants to correct anything I said feel free

Do you like, understand how casual sex work?
It has nothing to do with relationships...

With that, well, I think the same mostly applies. Unless through specific ways of getting it.

[Natapoc]

Because rape is just a misunderstanding right? I can't believe the MRA types on this site keep falling for your faux feminism. No feminist would make the argument that rapists do not act in bad faith. I can't imagine a feminist making the argument you are making right now.

Sorry, I don't hate men.
I'm sure there are the jerks, ignorants, within the campuses, who thinks, in good faith, they have sex with a drunk woman and they're instead raping her.
That's why it should be VERBALLY expressed and it should be VERY clear that drunk sex is always rape.
Real Feminists pushed for VERBAL consent, not for this mess.

So...

1. You are for the death penalty for rapists.
2. You think rapists are just confused people who don't know they are doing wrong or simply "misunderstood" a woman's signals.

I can accept that you believe #1 or #2 but not both.

The only alternative would be that you think ignorance and "misunderstandings" should be punishable by death.

[Chessmistress]

Do you like, understand how casual sex work?
It has nothing to do with relationships...

With that, well, I think the same mostly applies. Unless through specific ways of getting it.

My point is:
There are some guys who are ignorants, jerks, who have "sex" with unknown drunk girls, thinking in good faith they're having sex, and they're instead raping those girls.
That would be more easy if it would be very clear that consent must be VERBALLY expressed and checked: Feminists within the campuses in California are teaching exactly that. Same for drunk sex: it's very hard, almost impossible, to understand if an unknown person is "intoxicated" or "too intoxicated to consent" - it should be made very clear that drunk sex is always rape.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Sorry, I don't hate men.
I'm sure there are the jerks, ignorants, within the campuses, who thinks, in good faith, they have sex with a drunk woman and they're instead raping her.
That's why it should be VERBALLY expressed and it should be VERY clear that drunk sex is always rape.
Real Feminists pushed for VERBAL consent, not for this mess.

So...

1. You are for the death penalty for rapists.
2. You think rapists are just confused people who don't know they are doing wrong or simply "misunderstood" a woman's signals.

I can accept that you believe #1 or #2 but not both.

The only alternative would be that you think ignorance and "misunderstandings" should be punishable by death.

Which might be a bit of an own goal.

[Napkiraly]

If it's a drunk girl initiating the sex with a drunk guy, who is the rapist?

[Val Halla]

With that, well, I think the same mostly applies. Unless through specific ways of getting it.

My point is:
There are some guys who are ignorants, jerks, who have "sex" with unknown drunk girls, thinking in good faith they're having sex, and they're instead raping those girls.
That would be more easy if it would be very clear that consent must be VERBALLY expressed and checked: Feminists within the campuses in California are teaching exactly that. Same for drunk sex: it's very hard, almost impossible, to understand if an unknown person is "intoxicated" or "too intoxicated to consent" - it should be made very clear that drunk sex is always rape.

You think that would stop drunks?

Plus, some gals are ignorant jerks when drunk. In fact, in my personal experience, drunk girls harrass guys more than the other way around

[Val Halla]

If it's a drunk girl initiating the sex with a drunk guy, who is the rapist?

Obviously the male. It's always them who are rapists. Obvs. Girls are the bestest, we need to give them more laws in their favour

[Fartsniffage]

If it's a drunk girl initiating the sex with a drunk guy, who is the rapist?

Obviously the male. It's always them who are rapists. Obvs. Girls are the bestest, we need to give them more laws in their favour

In the UK it really is always the male. It's impossible for a cis-woman to commit rape.

[Napkiraly]

My point is:
There are some guys who are ignorants, jerks, who have "sex" with unknown drunk girls, thinking in good faith they're having sex, and they're instead raping those girls.
That would be more easy if it would be very clear that consent must be VERBALLY expressed and checked: Feminists within the campuses in California are teaching exactly that. Same for drunk sex: it's very hard, almost impossible, to understand if an unknown person is "intoxicated" or "too intoxicated to consent" - it should be made very clear that drunk sex is always rape.

You think that would stop drunks?

Plus, some gals are ignorant jerks when drunk. In fact, in my personal experience, drunk girls harrass guys more than the other way around

It's about equal in my experience. And if both are drunk, who do you punish? Is it who was more intoxicated? Then how do you establish that? Is it always the guy? Well, then what about women who initiate it? Do we charge them with raping each other? How the fuck does that work?

[Val Halla]

Obviously the male. It's always them who are rapists. Obvs. Girls are the bestest, we need to give them more laws in their favour

In the UK it really is always the male. It's impossible for a cis-woman to commit rape.

Wow, really? o.o

You think that would stop drunks?

Plus, some gals are ignorant jerks when drunk. In fact, in my personal experience, drunk girls harrass guys more than the other way around

It's about equal in my experience. And if both are drunk, who do you punish? Is it who was more intoxicated? Then how do you establish that? Is it always the guy? Well, then what about women who initiate it? Do we charge them with raping each other? How the fuck does that work?

I wouldn't prosecute drunk sex regardless without a no. Or if someone is like, passed out or something

[Fartsniffage]

Wow, really? o.o

Yep. Gotta have a cock.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... /section/1

[Chessmistress]

Sorry, I don't hate men.
I'm sure there are the jerks, ignorants, within the campuses, who thinks, in good faith, they have sex with a drunk woman and they're instead raping her.
That's why it should be VERBALLY expressed and it should be VERY clear that drunk sex is always rape.
Real Feminists pushed for VERBAL consent, not for this mess.

So...

1. You are for the death penalty for rapists.
2. You think rapists are just confused people who don't know they are doing wrong or simply "misunderstood" a woman's signals.

I can accept that you believe #1 or #2 but not both.

The only alternative would be that you think ignorance and "misunderstandings" should be punishable by death.

Nope.
Death penalty for rapists should applies just only to horrible cases. I stated it countless times.
I hope you understand there are circumstances and degrees.
I don't think "rapists are just confused people": I think that, given the actual culture of casual sex and drunk sex, there are some guys, a minority of people who actually rape, that thinks it's okay to have sex with an unknown drunk girl, and they aren't able to understand if she's "intoxicated" or "too intoxicated to consent", and they aren't able to understand if she's consenting through non-verbal behavior or she's just not consenting.
What about this situation:
She's too intoxicated to consent, but she actually have a behavior that seems consenting - in example smiling and hugging him (not because she likes to have sex with him, but because she's so drunk that she would hug even people she hate), then she's almost blacking out and she thinks she's doing sex with someone else.
That happened to me, years ago.
I'm not sure the guy was totally in bad faith, there's a chance he was unaware it wasn't sex but rape.

[Napkiraly]

In the UK it really is always the male. It's impossible for a cis-woman to commit rape.

Wow, really? o.o

It's about equal in my experience. And if both are drunk, who do you punish? Is it who was more intoxicated? Then how do you establish that? Is it always the guy? Well, then what about women who initiate it? Do we charge them with raping each other? How the fuck does that work?

I wouldn't prosecute drunk sex regardless without a no. Or if someone is like, passed out or something

Yeah, I mean someone passed out is entirely different. They have absolutely no way of consenting. Same thing for me if it's someone who is drunk and someone who isn't. But if both are drunk but still conscious, it's too fucking grey and then you get into the mess of establishing who raped who and how to establish that.

[Val Halla]

Wow, really? o.o

Yep. Gotta have a cock.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... /section/1

Holy shit.

Problem is that we don't have anyone campaigning to fix this. And anyone who would would likely just be dubbed a misogynist

[Val Halla]

Wow, really? o.o


I wouldn't prosecute drunk sex regardless without a no. Or if someone is like, passed out or something

Yeah, I mean someone passed out is entirely different. They have absolutely no way of consenting. Same thing for me if it's someone who is drunk and someone who isn't. But if both are drunk but still conscious, it's too fucking grey and then you get into the mess of establishing who raped who and how to establish that.

I think it kinda is best to air on the side of caution with something so serious.

[Napkiraly]

Yep. Gotta have a cock.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... /section/1

Holy shit.

Problem is that we don't have anyone campaigning to fix this. And anyone who would would likely just be dubbed a misogynist

Yep.

[Fartsniffage]

Yep. Gotta have a cock.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... /section/1

Holy shit.

Problem is that we don't have anyone campaigning to fix this. And anyone who would would likely just be dubbed a misogynist

Hah. That was the fix. It was all re-written in 2003. Good luck getting Parliament to look at it again for at least the next decade.

[Val Halla]

Holy shit.

Problem is that we don't have anyone campaigning to fix this. And anyone who would would likely just be dubbed a misogynist

Hah. That was the fix. It was all re-written in 2003. Good luck getting Parliament to look at it again for at least the next decade.

Of course this happened under Blegh.

[Chessmistress]

Wow, really? o.o

Yep. Gotta have a cock.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... /section/1

It isn't a real problem: maximum penalty for rape is up to 8 years. Women can be charged for "sexual assault" that carries the same maximum penalty, up to 8 years.
I think in UK they should focus on raising the maximum penalty to at laest 15 years, for both "rape" and "sexual assault".

[Fartsniffage]

Yep. Gotta have a cock.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... /section/1

It isn't a real problem: maximum penalty for rape is up to 8 years. Women can be charged for "sexual assault" that carries the same maximum penalty, up to 8 years.
I think in UK they should focus on raising the maximum penalty to at laest 15 years, for both "rape" and "sexual assault".

Not even close. The maximum for rape is life.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sent ... l/s1_rape/

Sexual Assault is 10 years.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sent ... l_assault/

[Napkiraly]

Yep. Gotta have a cock.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... /section/1

It isn't a real problem: maximum penalty for rape is up to 8 years. Women can be charged for "sexual assault" that carries the same maximum penalty, up to 8 years.
I think in UK they should focus on raising the maximum penalty to at laest 15 years, for both "rape" and "sexual assault".

Except rape is classified as a different crime. Still under the overall umbrella of sexual assault, but it's serious nature mandates it being treated as a completely different crime. In crime statistics they actually give two figures, one for sexual assault and then "number of sexual assaults that were rape".

Women can rape. Women who commit rape need to go to jail for rape. Rapists need to be convicted for rape, regardless of sex and gender.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Yep. Gotta have a cock.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... /section/1

It isn't a real problem: maximum penalty for rape is up to 8 years. Women can be charged for "sexual assault" that carries the same maximum penalty, up to 8 years.
I think in UK they should focus on raising the maximum penalty to at laest 15 years, for both "rape" and "sexual assault".

If it isn't a real problem, I assume you wouldn't mind if we reversed the law, so that only women can rape.

No?

Thought not.

[Nariterrr]

It isn't a real problem: maximum penalty for rape is up to 8 years. Women can be charged for "sexual assault" that carries the same maximum penalty, up to 8 years.
I think in UK they should focus on raising the maximum penalty to at laest 15 years, for both "rape" and "sexual assault".

If it isn't a real problem, I assume you wouldn't mind if we reversed the law, so that only women can rape.

No?

Thought not.

Rape applies to both genders if I am correct.

[Fartsniffage]

If it isn't a real problem, I assume you wouldn't mind if we reversed the law, so that only women can rape.

No?

Thought not.

Rape applies to both genders if I am correct.

viewtopic.php?p=27553958#p27553958