Why Are Right Wing Men So Sad?

Post Reply New Topic

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.



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



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

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 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".

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 ret*d 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.

Christians rape, too.

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

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.

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.



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.



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.

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.




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.

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.





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

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?





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.

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.

Insisting it was "consensual" doesn't count.

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.

You dodged the question.