Page 16 of 25 [ 397 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 ... 25  Next

Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 2,061
Location: England

31 Jul 2021, 7:05 am

Bradleigh wrote:
You know, people can dress sexy for themselves, just because someone is in an incredibly sexy dress, doesn't mean they are necessarily doing it just because they are hoping to attract the attention of dudes to pull them into something.


True, but the intentions of the person wearing it don't really matter when determining the mental state of the other party (humans aren't mind readers) - unless they are explicitly stated beforehand.

XFilesGeek wrote:
Dressing a certain way, or hanging out at a particular location is not consent to sex.


Correct, but again: it may be a factor in a situation where a reasonable person (in the legal sense) might construe consent.

XFilesGeek wrote:
What men find "provocative" varies with education and culture. It is not a universal constant.

I get tired of the narrative that "boys will be boys," and that men can't control themselves.


Who are you arguing with? Because it isn't me apparently.


_________________
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: -
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,169

31 Jul 2021, 7:06 am

cyberdad wrote:
hurtloam wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
hurtloam wrote:
It seems to me the peadophiles will try and grab onto anything or anyone to make themselves legitimate.


Pedophilia is an addiction, and pedophiles behave like addicts in manipulating their environment and people around them (just like addicts) to make accessing what they crave closer.



The good thing about this thread is that we all agree that we hate them.


I consider them dangerous. It's like being a hungry vampire seeing people with blood all around them.


I guess the difference is whether you hate them and want to punish them or whether you consider them sick and want to therapize them. Personally, I think being a pedophile must be awfully hard - having a sexual orientation vilified in all modern cultures.
That's of course no excuse for acting on one's sexual drive, because unlike other sexual orientations, this one has an object which can not give consent, and takes damage from it.


_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.


Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 2,061
Location: England

31 Jul 2021, 7:21 am

hurtloam wrote:
Agreed. This thread is horrible. So if I entertain the attention of a guy for a few hours whilst looking nice the logic is just because some people are into one night stands that means I'm automatically assumed to be one of those people because I like to dance and got on well with someone I met whilst out dancing. Yuck.

And men wonder why women ignore them whilst their out having fun with their friends.


I have sympathy for you - but this is, alas, the horrible post-Christian world we have collectively, negligently created. I would much prefer a different world, but this is what we are and what we have at the moment. ^ That, like it or not, is how many people socialise and seek short-term-maybe-later-long-term partners today. Camille Paglia once said in regards to clothing and behaviour "If you're advertising, be ready to sell" I understand the point but I don't much like it, even that sounds a bit too rapey. I would tweak it "If you're advertising, be ready to be approached by and to deal with prospective buyers".


_________________
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: -
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


XFilesGeek
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

31 Jul 2021, 7:25 am

Mikah wrote:
Bradleigh wrote:
You know, people can dress sexy for themselves, just because someone is in an incredibly sexy dress, doesn't mean they are necessarily doing it just because they are hoping to attract the attention of dudes to pull them into something.


True, but the intentions of the person wearing it don't really matter when determining the mental state of the other party (humans aren't mind readers) - unless they are explicitly stated beforehand.

XFilesGeek wrote:
Dressing a certain way, or hanging out at a particular location is not consent to sex.


Correct, but again: it may be a factor in a situation where a reasonable person (in the legal sense) might construe consent.

XFilesGeek wrote:
What men find "provocative" varies with education and culture. It is not a universal constant.

I get tired of the narrative that "boys will be boys," and that men can't control themselves.


Who are you arguing with? Because it isn't me apparently.


There is no situation where a woman dressing a certain way, or being in a particular location can be interpreted as consent. The only exception is if the perpetrator in question has been medically found to be mentally retarded in some fashion.

The entire concept of dressing "provocatively" is highly subjective and differs between individuals and cultures. The idea that men should be free to grab, grope, or even rape women if, in their personal opinion, the woman was "asking for it" via either her clothes or location, is, frankly, disturbing.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


XFilesGeek
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

31 Jul 2021, 7:26 am

Mikah wrote:
hurtloam wrote:
Agreed. This thread is horrible. So if I entertain the attention of a guy for a few hours whilst looking nice the logic is just because some people are into one night stands that means I'm automatically assumed to be one of those people because I like to dance and got on well with someone I met whilst out dancing. Yuck.

And men wonder why women ignore them whilst their out having fun with their friends.


I have sympathy for you - but this is, alas, the horrible post-Christian world we have collectively, negligently created. I would much prefer a different world, but this is what we are and what we have at the moment. ^ That, like it or not, is how many people socialise and seek short-term-maybe-later-long-term partners today. Camille Paglia once said in regards to clothing and behaviour "If you're advertising, be ready to sell" I understand the point but I don't much like it, even that sounds a bit too rapey. I would tweak it "If you're advertising, be ready to be approached by and to deal with prospective buyers".


Christians rape, too. :roll:


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 42,969
Location: Houston, Texas

31 Jul 2021, 7:32 am

In all honestly, I think it’s because the ideals of today don’t resemble those of the classic 50s/60s sitcoms.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!


Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 31
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,612
Location: Brisbane, Australia

31 Jul 2021, 7:40 am

Mikah wrote:
Bradleigh wrote:
You know, people can dress sexy for themselves, just because someone is in an incredibly sexy dress, doesn't mean they are necessarily doing it just because they are hoping to attract the attention of dudes to pull them into something.


True, but the intentions of the person wearing it don't really matter when determining the mental state of the other party (humans aren't mind readers) - unless they are explicitly stated beforehand.


For people not being mind readers, that is why it is important to get get spoken consent rather than accept the absence of a no, and not have other things that might manipulate them into doing so like getting drunk. It is besides the fact that a guy might somehow genuinely not recognise himself as a rapist, the preference is to have circumstances that lower the risk of a victim, not just defend some dudes that were taught that a broad in a short skirt means that she wants someone to feel her up.

And I think that is a part relevant to this topic, where the type of men being mentioned are used to seeing a woman being dolled up as a piece of meat. You hear comments where they say things like a woman is apparently wearing makeup just to "attract a mate", and don't really get that sometimes women want to put something on their own reasons. Said men can get rather upset when this idea they have of women is met by real women that they don't really want anything to do with them.


_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall


Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 2,061
Location: England

31 Jul 2021, 8:16 am

XFilesGeek wrote:
There is no situation where a woman dressing a certain way, or being in a particular location can be interpreted as consent. The only exception is if the perpetrator in question has been medically found to be mentally retarded in some fashion.

The entire concept of dressing "provocatively" is highly subjective and differs between individuals and cultures. The idea that men should be free to grab, grope, or even rape women if, in their personal opinion, the woman was "asking for it" via either her clothes or location, is, frankly, disturbing.


Maybe a hypothetical is due. Let's have a freezing up scenario where a man chats to a woman for say 30 minutes, initiates a physical situation, has sex with a woman in the toilet of an establishment (ugh) who gives no verbal or physical resistance. The woman says she was raped. The man claims he really believed consent had been given - if a court agrees with him, he is not guilty, and rightly so.

The two scenarios are identical except:
- one takes place in a supermarket, the woman is wearing a rain coat
- the other takes place in a nightclub, the woman is wearing hot pants and a short skimpy top

can we at least agree the location and attire of the woman might matter in such a scenario when determining whether the man might reasonably have believed consent was given.

XFilesGeek wrote:
Christians rape, too.


I'm not sure you're all there today XFG, but to clarify the comparison I was making was to a world where courting was much more formal - chaperones, familial oversight, no expectation of sex before marriage, chastity valued rather than mocked etc.

Bradleigh wrote:
For people not being mind readers, that is why it is important to get get spoken consent rather than accept the absence of a no


Not just that but continuing "active" verbal consent throughout - to deal with scenarios where someone might want withdraw consent in the middle of the act. I've said it already but this is just a flight of fancy. In real life and even in fictional media such behaviour would seem beyond ridiculous, moment-ruining, unromantic etc. It just isn't going to happen on a large scale. A better idea is needed.


_________________
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: -
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 31
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,612
Location: Brisbane, Australia

31 Jul 2021, 9:05 am

Mikah wrote:
The two scenarios are identical except:
- one takes place in a supermarket, the woman is wearing a rain coat
- the other takes place in a nightclub, the woman is wearing hot pants and a short skimpy top

can we at least agree the location and attire of the woman might matter in such a scenario when determining whether the man might reasonably have believed consent was given.


It really doesn't change it. Really reminds me of an element of the geek culture, surrounding cosplay, where certain people have to continue to be told that cosplay is not an invitation to touch, regardless of how skimpy or full covering that it is. I am sure there are some preconceptions of the idea of what kind of person would go to a nightclub in hotpants and a small top, but in the scheme of things it really doesn't mean that verbal consent should be needed.

From another point of view, you have a woman who decided to go out in something comfortable, perhaps she is proud in her figure from following a workout routine. She decides to talk to a guy for a bit, before he suddenly starts touching her, it wasn't what she wanted, and she suddenly realises that she doesn't have any friends around, plus he looks a little drunk and she is suddenly afraid that he might hurt her if she suddenly comes across too strongly in turning him down. In cases like these where people freeze, it can be rather difficult shout no, especially when they might factor in not sure if that guy might have friends around while they are alone, or perhaps she might have been drinking a little bit.


Mikah wrote:
Not just that but continuing "active" verbal consent throughout - to deal with scenarios where someone might want withdraw consent in the middle of the act. I've said it already but this is just a flight of fancy. In real life and even in fictional media such behaviour would seem beyond ridiculous, moment-ruining, unromantic etc. It just isn't going to happen on a large scale. A better idea is needed.


We are talking about asking before different thresholds, such as asking if something would be okay, making it clear that it is safe for them to back out at any time, and you are listening to their needs. The idea of moment killing seems more than a bit subjective, like I could imagine what someone who might be taking their cues from Japanese porn might think what is a moment.

I watched a particular movie a while back that happened to have a scene around I think the middle, where one of the guys kind of forced himself on the other, and sort of ignored being told he didn't want things to go that way, which fit in a lot certain fetishist idea of what might be considered a moment. The movie from there kind of followed that he indeed ruined the trust of his friend, and in the end had a wonderful moment together in asking for consent before starting anything.

Checking on a partner is able to clearly think through and consent, doesn't have to be a mood killer.


_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall


XFilesGeek
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

31 Jul 2021, 1:23 pm

Mikah wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
There is no situation where a woman dressing a certain way, or being in a particular location can be interpreted as consent. The only exception is if the perpetrator in question has been medically found to be mentally retarded in some fashion.

The entire concept of dressing "provocatively" is highly subjective and differs between individuals and cultures. The idea that men should be free to grab, grope, or even rape women if, in their personal opinion, the woman was "asking for it" via either her clothes or location, is, frankly, disturbing.


Maybe a hypothetical is due. Let's have a freezing up scenario where a man chats to a woman for say 30 minutes, initiates a physical situation, has sex with a woman in the toilet of an establishment (ugh) who gives no verbal or physical resistance. The woman says she was raped. The man claims he really believed consent had been given - if a court agrees with him, he is not guilty, and rightly so.

The two scenarios are identical except:
- one takes place in a supermarket, the woman is wearing a rain coat
- the other takes place in a nightclub, the woman is wearing hot pants and a short skimpy top

can we at least agree the location and attire of the woman might matter in such a scenario when determining whether the man might reasonably have believed consent was given.


No. What someone is wearing, or where someone is, has no bearing on whether or not they consent to sex.

And defense attorneys are no longer allowed to grill rape victims on their attire.

XFilesGeek wrote:
Christians rape, too.


Quote:
I'm not sure you're all there today XFG, but to clarify the comparison I was making was to a world where courting was much more formal - chaperones, familial oversight, no expectation of sex before marriage, chastity valued rather than mocked


There was never a world where rape wasn't a thing.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 2,061
Location: England

31 Jul 2021, 1:56 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
No. What someone is wearing, or where someone is, has no bearing on whether or not they consent to sex.

And defense attorneys are no longer allowed to grill rape victims on their attire.


You keep avoiding the question of mens rea and falling back on the same one-liners. Do you think mens rea should not apply for sexual crimes?

XFilesGeek wrote:
Christians rape, too.


XFilesGeek wrote:
There was never a world where rape wasn't a thing.


I have no idea where you are going with this, or where this has come from. I was originally responding to hurtloam about being assumed to be sexually available.


_________________
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: -
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 13,460
Location: I'm right here

31 Jul 2021, 2:00 pm

Mikah wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
No. What someone is wearing, or where someone is, has no bearing on whether or not they consent to sex.

And defense attorneys are no longer allowed to grill rape victims on their attire.


You keep avoiding the question of mens rea and falling back on the same one-liners. Do you think mens rea should not apply for sexual crimes?


It's unreasonable to treat 'she was at a club and dressed revealingly' as confirmation of consent.

It is probably an excuse in instances where someone signs a contract in advance and changes their mind part way through without pro-actively stating so.


_________________
the problem with capitalism is that eventually you run out of other people's resources and cheap labour to exploit
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


IsabellaLinton
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 40,278

31 Jul 2021, 2:03 pm

Image

Insisting it was "consensual" doesn't count.



Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 2,061
Location: England

31 Jul 2021, 2:11 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
It's unreasonable to treat 'she was at a club and dressed revealingly' as confirmation of consent.


How about we go to an absurd example. Change my scenario above, except the woman is wearing no clothes and they are in a sex club. Now, I would agree that being naked in a sex club does not necessarily mean the woman is there looking for sex at that specific time... but could it possibly, reasonably be interpreted by a third party that she might be?


_________________
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: -
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 13,460
Location: I'm right here

31 Jul 2021, 2:13 pm

Mikah wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
It's unreasonable to treat 'she was at a club and dressed revealingly' as confirmation of consent.


How about we go to an absurd example. Change my scenario above, except the woman is wearing no clothes and they are in a sex club. Now, I would agree that being naked in a sex club does not necessarily mean the woman is there looking for sex at that specific time... but could it possibly, reasonably be interpreted by a third party that she might be?


She's entitled to be there for sex with some people who are there and still refuse contact with others unless it's explicitly stated that by entering that room one is choosing to waive that right.


_________________
the problem with capitalism is that eventually you run out of other people's resources and cheap labour to exploit
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 2,061
Location: England

31 Jul 2021, 2:15 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
She's entitled to be there for sex with some people who are there and still refuse contact with others unless it's explicitly stated that by entering that room one is choosing to waive that right.


You dodged the question.


_________________
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: -
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!