Atheistforums

Extraordinary Claims => Religion General Discussion => Judaism => Topic started by: Valigarmander on June 10, 2015, 05:16:06 PM

Title: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Valigarmander on June 10, 2015, 05:16:06 PM
So says the Talmud. (http://jezebel.com/dr-ruth-being-naked-with-a-man-is-like-playing-in-tra-1708532203)
Quote
The internet’s in an uproar today over the comments of teeny-tiny sex columnist Dr. Ruth Westheimer, who said in an interview Monday that it’s “not possible” to change your mind about having sex with someone once all parties are already naked. We’ll remind you that Dr. Ruth is 87 years old.

In a interview with Diane Rehm to promote her new book The Doctor Is In, Dr. Ruth, as the Washingtonian reports, expressed some controversial views on consent:

    I am very worried about college campuses saying that a woman and a man—or two men or two women, but I talk right now about women and men—can be in bed together, Diane, and at one time, naked, and at one time he or she, most of the time they think she, can say “I changed my mind.”

    No such thing is possible. In the Talmud, in the Jewish tradition, it says when that part of the male anatomy is aroused and there’s an erection, the brain flies out of that and we have to take that very seriously, so I don’t agree with that.


As the internet started getting mad today, Dr. Ruth added this:

I am 100% against rape. I do say to women if they don't want to have sex with a man, they should not be naked in bed w/him.

That's risky behavior like crossing street against the light. If a driver hits you, he's legally in the wrong but you're in the hospital.


Once again: Dr. Ruth was born 87 years ago.

This isn’t the first time she’s expressed that sex is a “no backsies” situation; she told a Haaretz columnist in March that she planned to tell the Israeli Bar Association the same thing:

    “I do not believe that when partners are naked they can say at any time ‘I changed my mind,’” Westheimer plans to tell the lawyers at the convention. “In the Talmud they say, when that part of the male anatomy is aroused, the brain flies out of the head.” In other words, she adds: “It’s nonsense to suddenly, at the height of sexual arousal, say ‘I changed my mind.’ It will lead to many more problems. The idea of consent is nonsense. Except consent before they are naked in bed.”

Just a reminder that yes, you can change your mind at any point during sex. Dr. Ruth is not the boss of you, and right though she may be on the joys of spanking, if someone asks you to stop having sex with them, you should do so.
"In the Talmud they say, when that part of the male anatomy is aroused, the brain flies out of the head." Apparently religion has the same effect. It's disappointing to hear drivel like this from such an intelligent person.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 10, 2015, 05:26:03 PM
I've always held that telling women not to dress a certain way or do a certain thing because it might lead to rape really sells men short, like they're somehow incapable of raping. If dressing slutty is a surefire way to end up a victim, how in the actual hell does a day at the beach not turn into some tragic, nonconsensual orgy?

Furthermore, I would venture to say that millions of individuals probably visit gentleman's clubs every day without raping the employees there.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: AllPurposeAtheist on June 10, 2015, 07:06:18 PM
Well. .the good doctor makes a point. . Don't be getting naked in bed with someone and THEN  saying no unless you're looking for an argument. .
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: GSOgymrat on June 10, 2015, 07:17:39 PM
This reminds me of a close gay friend who has told more then one guy to leave once the guy undressed and... well let's say didn't live up to expectations. SO RUDE.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 10, 2015, 07:53:01 PM
Religion aside, I would agree with her argument, once you're naked the guy is not about to go all moral at the drop of a word. Sure we can, and we have..but it is a risky proposition. I agree with her, once you're naked and rubbing bellies, something is about to happen.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mermaid on June 10, 2015, 07:58:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Religion aside, I would agree with her argument, once you're naked the guy is not about to go all moral at the drop of a word. Sure we can, and we have..but it is a risky proposition. I agree with her, once you're naked and rubbing bellies, something is about to happen.
So it's her fault if he proceeds to have sex with her against her will?

Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 10, 2015, 08:48:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So it's her fault if he proceeds to have sex with her against her will?


she made her point quite well, men don't often think with the big head when the little one is stiff and ready. If you don't want to have sex, maybe you should not get naked and crawl in bed and start rubbing against the guy..you know?  I mean really…I can tell you I have no fucking intention of getting naked and getting into bed with a gal I don't want to have sex with…why is this so hard with women? It has been proven pretty well by now that this is not a great situation to put yourself into.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 10, 2015, 09:01:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
she made her point quite well, men don't often think with the big head when the little one is stiff and ready.
Don't often, or can't? I refuse to debase men by telling them they're incapable of controlling themselves when they have an erection. Again, by this logic, sexual assault rates at strip clubs should be through the roof, yet somehow, they aren't. Men are better than that. Rapists are not.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you don't want to have sex, maybe you should not get naked and crawl in bed and start rubbing against the guy..you know?
So people are not allowed to change their minds? I'm sorry, but even if a woman is having sex with a guy and she asks him to stop mid-stroke, he needs to stop.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 10, 2015, 09:07:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
if a woman is having sex with a guy and she asks him to stop mid-stroke, he needs to stop.

I am sure you will be successful should the occasion ever arise.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 10, 2015, 09:38:57 PM
"But officer, I was drunk... I should be excused, because I couldn't control myself!"

"But officer, I was horny... I should be excused, because I couldn't control myself!"

Not sure why the first one is universally accepted as a bad excuse, but the second one has any more merit.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 10, 2015, 09:58:52 PM
How many women get a kick out of getting a guy aroused and then say no for the fun of it? We used to call them prick teasers. Why would any woman lead a man on until they are naked in bed and say no unless she is being an ass? Would a guy do that?  A woman should be able to say no, but leading men on to the point of being naked in bed is pretty damned stupid in my opinion.  Just kidding girls, because women wouldn't do that, would they? When men are aroused and can't ejaculate it hurts like hell ladies. Don't girls and woman like sex, or is it just a game for them to make men hurt? Maybe if society didn't look down on woman that like sex and call them whores, or woman that hate men, this wouldn't be a problem.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 10, 2015, 10:13:39 PM
I have to side with the females in this one.  If either partner wants to stop, even in the middle, they should be allowed to do so.  Even if they are married. 
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: AllPurposeAtheist on June 10, 2015, 10:28:12 PM
So the take away guys is if you're fucking and about 1.3 seconds from ejaculation and she or even he changes their minds you should just go,  "Well ok then..", pull out and chalk it up to. ..well,  you know. . No harm,  no foul and whatever the other person wants even 1.3 seconds before blast off..

Well I'm so glad we've cleared this whole sticky situation up before it became stickier... :eek:
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 10, 2015, 10:30:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So the take away guys is if you're fucking and about 1.3 seconds from ejaculation and she or even he changes their minds you should just go,  "Well ok then..", pull out and chalk it up to. ..well,  you know. . No harm,  no foul and whatever the other person wants even 1.3 seconds before blast off..

Well I'm so glad we've cleared this whole sticky situation up before it became stickier... :eek:
At 1.3 sec., sure.  At 1.2, that I'm not sure about.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: AllPurposeAtheist on June 11, 2015, 12:26:39 AM
Toss the good doc in the list of distractions. .
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q490/atheola/jenner.jpg)
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Valigarmander on June 11, 2015, 04:50:21 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How many women get a kick out of getting a guy aroused and then say no for the fun of it? We used to call them prick teasers. Why would any woman lead a man on until they are naked in bed and say no unless she is being an ass? Would a guy do that?  A woman should be able to say no, but leading men on to the point of being naked in bed is pretty damned stupid in my opinion.  Just kidding girls, because women wouldn't do that, would they? When men are aroused and can't ejaculate it hurts like hell ladies. Don't girls and woman like sex, or is it just a game for them to make men hurt? Maybe if society didn't look down on woman that like sex and call them whores, or woman that hate men, this wouldn't be a problem.
Is this something that's happened to you before? Because I can't say it has for me. Though I have been asked to stop because it's getting too sensitive or it's starting to hurt, or because she's tired and needs to take a break, and I can imagine a number of other legitimate reasons a woman (or man) would have to halt intercourse, as opposed to her just being a tease.

In any case, I don't think wanting to nut is a good enough reason to continue fucking a woman when she's telling you to stop.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 11, 2015, 08:07:27 AM
I think what the good Dr is saying, and I think correctly, is that the time to decide you don't want to have sex is best done before  you are naked and guiding a dick into you, humping a little and then changing your mind. In other words, if other words actually need to be offered, "Think BEFORE you fuck". I agree with  the good lady.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 11, 2015, 08:48:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How many women get a kick out of getting a guy aroused and then say no for the fun of it? We used to call them prick teasers. Why would any woman lead a man on until they are naked in bed and say no unless she is being an ass? Would a guy do that?  A woman should be able to say no, but leading men on to the point of being naked in bed is pretty damned stupid in my opinion.  Just kidding girls, because women wouldn't do that, would they? When men are aroused and can't ejaculate it hurts like hell ladies. Don't girls and woman like sex, or is it just a game for them to make men hurt? Maybe if society didn't look down on woman that like sex and call them whores, or woman that hate men, this wouldn't be a problem.

I wouldn't know where to begin to answer to this^ bullshit, however as you sound like a horny 15 year old teenager who sees girls as some rival team in this post, I don't think an answer is necessary at all. Let's try again later when you feel like an adult.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Sal1981 on June 11, 2015, 12:21:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well. .the good doctor makes a point. . Don't be getting naked in bed with someone and THEN  saying no unless you're looking for an argument. .
Tell that to married people :lol:
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: AllPurposeAtheist on June 11, 2015, 01:58:15 PM
I guess the old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure is soooooooo old fashioned.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 11, 2015, 02:49:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I guess the old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure is soooooooo old fashioned.

It's not, I just don't see how it applies in this case, because it assumes a man almost has no other option than to force a woman into sex if he sees her naked, as if he's incapable of controlling his impulses.

I get it, you play with fire, you may get burned. Men aren't fire. They are living, sentient beings with free will and a capacity to make conscious decisions, and sorry, I don't buy the notion that an erect penis overrides all intelligent thought and understanding of consequences. When we keep acting like "it's bound to happen" that just keeps ensuring that it does. In this day and age in most Western countries, reasonable people wouldn't tell a battered housewife that it's her fault she gets beaten if she knows her husband has a violent temper and she does things that make him angry. 50 years ago, most people would. So what society needs is an attitude shift, not more victim blaming.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 11, 2015, 04:03:37 PM
My father often told me, "In any arrangement, whoever has the most to loose, needs to shoulder the most responsibility to ensure the arrangement is met to the approval of both sides. It may seem unfair, but not only is it foolish, but dangerous, to entrust your welfare to someone else."

If your going to play with snakes......

Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 11, 2015, 07:49:53 PM
So apparently when you get a stiffy, the only solution is sex. Under no circumstances could you possibly settle for jerking off or *le gaspe* waiting awhile.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 11, 2015, 07:54:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So apparently when you get a stiffy, the only solution is sex. Under no circumstances could you possibly settle for jerking off or *le gaspe* waiting awhile.
Hey--Five Fingered Mary is like the EverReady Bunny--ever ready!
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 11, 2015, 11:26:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Is this something that's happened to you before? Because I can't say it has for me. Though I have been asked to stop because it's getting too sensitive or it's starting to hurt, or because she's tired and needs to take a break, and I can imagine a number of other legitimate reasons a woman (or man) would have to halt intercourse, as opposed to her just being a tease.

In any case, I don't think wanting to nut is a good enough reason to continue fucking a woman when she's telling you to stop.
I was talking about women that get a kick out of being prick teasers not every woman. I had a bisexual androgynous girlfriend that had a medical condition that resulted in her having a very small and short vagina that it hurt if she had sex with a guy that got too rough. Simple solution, she got on top so she could control it. I have had women that didn't lubricate and it hurt and I stopped. I thought I was making it clear I was talking about woman that like to play games with men because they think it is funny to work a guy up and say "STOP!" When I was a teenager it was agreed that when women said stop they meant yes, but were afraid to get pregnant. Why am I always misunderstood here, don't I explain well enough, or is it because I'm a hedonist and don't go by societal rules of conduct between consenting adults. I've only had one woman complain about sex with me, and she said I feel so dirty after she had an orgasm that bought the backboard down on the bed when she pulled on it. If two people are consenting adults and clean, anything goes in my opinion. I had an older woman ask me if I thought sex was dirty----I told her only if it is done correctly and uncivilized. Now, she was foaming at the mouth.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 11, 2015, 11:38:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I wouldn't know where to begin to answer to this^ bullshit, however as you sound like a horny 15 year old teenager who sees girls as some rival team in this post, I don't think an answer is necessary at all. Let's try again later when you feel like an adult.

You have been nasty to me since you have came here. I'm 73 years old and hardly horny anymore after having prostate cancer and unable to get turned on anymore. I was a horny teen ager, middle aged man, and old man until I had cancer. You make it sound like there is something wrong about a man being horny---care to explain why? I don't think of women as rivals even when I was young and horny, and the girls and woman I knew were gay, bisexual, straight, prostitutes (the first time at 14 years old.), what people call whores, cunts, pigs, that enjoyed sex and didn't cut down men like you do with me all the time. What is your problem with me? I'm no Saint, and I don't give a damned about my reputation, and I'm sure not looking for your approval.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 12, 2015, 04:45:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You have been nasty to me since you have came here. I'm 73 years old and hardly horny anymore after having prostate cancer and unable to get turned on anymore. I was a horny teen ager, middle aged man, and old man until I had cancer. You make it sound like there is something wrong about a man being horny---care to explain why? I don't think of women as rivals even when I was young and horny, and the girls and woman I knew were gay, bisexual, straight, prostitutes (the first time at 14 years old.), what people call whores, cunts, pigs, that enjoyed sex and didn't cut down men like you do with me all the time. What is your problem with me? I'm no Saint, and I don't give a damned about my reputation, and I'm sure not looking for your approval.

No, I haven't been nasty to you. But I can be if you insist.

I also think something is wrong with you at the moment. You are usually not like this. You are acting stupid. I don't mean, 'you stupid!', I mean you are acting like an under capacitated person, you have no idea what is going on and giving some meaningless reactions, posting pure bullshit.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mr.Obvious on June 12, 2015, 05:23:36 AM
I think we can all see that if one or more of the potential sexual partners is going to change their mind, it's always better to do this sooner than later. The sooner in the process, the less awkward and unpleasant the experience is. That's a no brainer.
But there is no 'one-moment' in which a person's autonomy and right to change his/her mind stops being relevant. Not when you've been invited in for coffee. Not when you're naked. And not when you're actually doing the deed. Is it unpleasant, unsatisfying and awkward to stop at such a moment? Undoubtedly, but that's the chance you take when you try to have sex with a human with cognition and a will and choices of his/her own.
Now, it may be easy for me to talk like this; never having been asked to stop in the moment of passion... And I can imagine it not being nice or even easy to come to a complete stop... But once consent, at any time in the process, is out the window; you should stop. If the places were turned, and you change your mind, no matter how unpleasant that may be for your partner, you'd want them to stop as well. Simple as that.

Consent is a fairly simple matter.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 12, 2015, 09:37:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No, I haven't been nasty to you. But I can be if you insist.

I also think something is wrong with you at the moment. You are usually not like this. You are acting stupid. I don't mean, 'you stupid!', I mean you are acting like an under capacitated person, you have no idea what is going on and giving some meaningless reactions, posting pure bullshit.
I know there is something wrong with you, and you are always like this with me. What the hell does it mean: "under capacitated." I don't know what's going on? And you do. Maybe they seem meaningless to you because you are projecting on to me your own neurosis.  You are always looking for a fight with me for some reason, please explain why you are not a happy person with me. I could care less what your opinions are and the drivel you post, but I do care when you make personal judgments of me like some self-righteous religious fanatic. You were told to get off your high horse by another person at this forum, it was good advice you should consider.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 12, 2015, 10:25:49 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I know there is something wrong with you, and you are always like this with me. What the hell does it mean: "under capacitated." I don't know what's going on? And you do. Maybe they seem meaningless to you because you are projecting on to me your own neurosis.  You are always looking for a fight with me for some reason, please explain why you are not a happy person with me. I could care less what your opinions are and the drivel you post, but I do care when you make personal judgments of me like some self-righteous religious fanatic. You were told to get off your high horse by another person at this forum, it was good advice you should consider.

You are spewing bullshit and you are getting the reaction you deserve. Before you got that reaction because of the stunt you pulled with new members. I am sick of your 'she is being mean to me' whining and playing the victim.

You are writing sexist, meaningless drivel in this thread. Something a 15 year old kid would write. That's what I meant with my first post. Read your own posts. It's bullshit. I'll give the same reaction to anyone who writes that. You don't hold some special place. Stop trying to make this something more than it is.   
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on June 12, 2015, 10:49:24 AM
Most men in the US only see naked women when they're getting ready for sex. Until we separate nudity from "foreplay" we'll continue to have problems. I blame Victoria.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: stromboli on June 12, 2015, 10:53:17 AM
I have never personally been in a situation where I was naked in bed with a woman and there was a cessation of activity. If it got that far, the intent and outcome were already understood. I've met women that were so-called "cock teases" but I was smart enough to figure that out before it got that far. But that was only in clubs in the Navy and after, and those were women who were too weird for my taste. Never been into anything kinky or weird.

I suppose there are women who will get to a certain point of leading men on and then screaming rape, but I've never met one or never put myself in that situation. Common sense and self protection was never overruled by lust. And likewise I've heard my share of stories from guys- I've been in plenty of  "guy fraternities" like the crew of a ship or jobs I had that were in singularly male groups. But more often than not I think any issues that came up were guys thinking with their dicks and not their brains, fortunately a problem I've never had.

Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: stromboli on June 12, 2015, 10:55:11 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Most men in the US only see naked women when they're getting ready for sex. Until we separate nudity from "foreplay" we'll continue to have problems. I blame Victoria.

I agree.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 12, 2015, 01:21:03 PM
There could be many reasons for anyone to stop when just about to have sex or during it. For example, for some people the shape, texture of the genitals are very important and very strongly influences what they feel at that moment. Some people do not even think to kiss or suck (just simple sucking, not giving head) their partner's vagina/penis, while some cannot imagine a penis getting into them if they do not feel the desire to put it in their mouth when they see it. I am somewhat in the second group. I need to love a man's every inch. Esp. his penis in a 'seperate' way from his body. I need to warm up to it. If I don't want to kiss, lick suck..etc that man's every inch, I don't want him in me. And most of the time you get that when naked. Sure, this is not absloute. Sometimes you like somebody as a person in time, they grow on you and so how you see their physical appearance changes. But some times it goes the other way. You find someone attractive all along, but that disappears when they get naked. Sometimes, you feel horny and answer someone's advances, someone you know that is wrong and after getting into it, you come to your senses. Sometimes, someone you never guess, can speak to your skin...etc. We could work countless scenarios here.

People can call stop and get out of it any time. Consent is not just given once and done. It can be taken at any second. This is as simple as this.

Sex is awkward, messy, embarrassing at times. It's not something that is done to be perfect, aesthetic or watched from outside. Sure, we love to wach people having sex. But that's scripted. It's an act done by professionals. Real sex is never like that as we all know. It's between the people doing it. Anything can turn somebody off in any second or rise their apetite. You can accidentally fart, get a cramp, hit each other somewhere wrong while jumping on each other, have another accident...etc.

Apart from a few women who enjoys playing their seuxal power over men, this 'leading men on' thing mostly comes from the old patriarchal oppressive conditioning. The bullshit that men desire sex more than women and that they need it more than women and that they are mindless puppets once you turn them on, that you can make them jump hoops by showing a nipple, once blood walks into their penises so they should be emptied before they get functional. It has been used for control,to excuse rape, to subjugate female sexuality. Humans have impulse control.

What's the merit of 'leading on'? I've known a lot of men, western or eastern, even online, who thought looking into their eyes, smiling and laughing at their jokes while talking excitedly, paying good attention to them in a heated conversation, discussion meant for them that I was interested in and touching their shoulder, arms, face for example was a sign of 'leading on'. It's bullshit.

Especially, personally that's my experience with western men, because they come from less sexually oppressed culture, they are more likely to openly take anything as a sexual hint. The culture I live in, as it's a greater taboo, mostly people don't dare to show it that much.

Sure, may be for some people those things are not leading on, but what is what to whom? Because if you are naked with someone when they didn't want to go further, they simply stopped desiring you, because something happened and this could happen to anyone. Men are not entitled to get their way, because of the mechanics of their genitals.

Men need to get out of the frame that men are mindless pussy idiots. Because not just some women, but mostly men treat men and themselves this way. And also the bullshit that being rejected by a woman means something is wrong with their manhood. The collective idea -hopefully changing with the young generations- that they are ready -should be ready- to jump on very  pussy available around is a very stupid base for social norms. I don't find one man attractive, however others do. Same goes for me. A man can find me attractive while others don't feel anything- may be even turned off by me...etc.

Most men have a way of making this a goading issue, a competition, a score among themselves and so it gets blown of out of proportion. (Like the penis size issue. Men are more interested in penis size than any woman.) You can watch some men who never had an experience on this 'cock teasing', speaking about 'cock teasers' as a rule. 

Your penis is not something women should obey when erected that has to go to the finish. Exactly like the way a woman doesn't have a right to expect the perfect erection from you the moment she takes her clothes off. You can lose erection when a woman gets naked too.

Does anyone blame men for leading the woman on in that case, when they do not get an erection? No. Have you ever heard somethin called 'pussy teaser'?

However, with most men, being rejected while they are about to have sex is something about their manhood and male ego in general, more than facing a simple rejection by someone. It's just that, rejection. She is not turned on by you. Another one will be.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 12, 2015, 03:02:02 PM
Are you done having a hissy fit now?  I'm a sexist because I think a few woman hate men. Or is it because I think women are sex objects? You are whether you like it or not princess. I have always loved women, and still do, as I have posted here many times. You know, you remind me of a lesbian bar tender who berated me for asking for a Cuba Libra instead of a rum and coke when she was not aware they are the same thing, and then when she said they never had any Bacardi, I told her to give a rum and coke with what ever they wanted. She said if I wanted a Bacardi why didn't I ask for one. By the way, I was there with my bisexual girl friend at the time. Even she didn't understand the feminist rage at me. Is that it, you are a feminist that hates men? Are you a castrator like the bar girl was? If yes, you have bigger problems than me.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mermaid on June 12, 2015, 05:46:32 PM
I think the term "cock tease" really, really sucks. It implies a sort of entitlement to a woman's body, for one thing. I had that term used on me when I was young and not ready to have sex. It made me feel like there was something wrong with me.

So I was bad if I was a cock tease. I was a slut if I had sex, too, though. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

We are one fucked up culture.

That being said, I have been in that situation where I was naked in bed with someone and I said no to sex. It was a long time ago so I do not remember all the fine details, but I am guessing the reason I said no is as such: I wanted to have sex with him, but I didn't want to be a slut.

It is NEVER OKAY to assume you can go there without consent.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 12, 2015, 06:48:06 PM
I think the simple point here is that the old dr, whom by the way I admire, said some pretty straightforward advice that follows her experience. If you get in bed with a naked man and begin to fuck, don't be surprised if he does not stop when you ask him to. This is not a difficult thing to understand and despite the 20 or 30 or 50 year age gap the advice is sound. Once you're fucking, getting the male to stop is a lot harder than simply not starting. Really some of you are taking this into the area that "well, mankind has advanced…yada fucking yada"… you cannot assume someone else is going to look out for your best interests.

Yeah, sorry, I am one of those guys that if you say you got raped and you were naked in a bed shoving some guys dick into your snatch, I have a hard time standing on your side of the table.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 12, 2015, 08:02:22 PM
Humans have impulse control. When a man "goes on" without consent in bed, he is doing that because HE FEELS ENTITLED TO DO IT. Not because he can't stop  and go away, but because he chooses to. There is nothing else behind it, but people like you who think this is normal.

You are basically saying that rape is OK under some circumstances, and you will support the rapist. This is what is called rape culture. And also why it is defined by male  culture.

Oh and it has nothing to do with "mankind being advanced yada yada". You simply think it is OK for a man to rape a woman in some position because you don't think that's rape. And that's what most rapists feel. They don't think what They do is rape either.

There is really nothing much to say or discuss with your post.You support rape culture and think men have a right to rape women under some  circumstances and you think it is some New Age shit to call it as what it is. It is called Rape. Simple as this. Doesn't matter how you try to sell it.





 














Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 12, 2015, 08:05:59 PM
The issue of consent in the process of intercourse is a whole different beast from consent before intercourse, because now you've got instinct getting in the way of that all-important prefrontal cortex's ability to do higher reasoning. I can't speak to the female side of the equation, but if a man is in the throes, you can't get him to stop masturbating unless you do something to scare the living daylights out of him, much less actual intercourse. It's not a fully voluntary action at that point.

That said, being a few thrusts into it hardly qualifies as an excuse, much less simply being naked around your partner. If being naked were all it took, I'd have been in a lot of gangbang orgies any time gym class ended.


EDIT: Upon reflection, this is among the dumbest things I've ever written.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 12, 2015, 09:30:24 PM
Has anyone here even suggested that it was OK to screw a girl or woman if she says no? The problem is why a girl or woman thinks it is a good idea to let it go to the point of being nude with a man "acting" like you want sex and say no for whatever reason, and the fact that society thinks a woman should be called derogatory names if she does like to have sex. How many woman use sex as a way to have control over a man, or are afraid to have sex because it makes them feel dirty unless it is only to have children. Sex is a violent act even when it just involves intercourse that violates a woman's body even if she wants to.

I can understand why woman don't like to be violated, but why would a woman give every signal she wants to have sex and then expect a man to know she doesn't when after the ball is rolling and she says no while laying down naked with him? This is beyond being really a dumb thing to do, because it does make a woman look like a prick tease even if she isn't. There's more going on than just a man wanting sex and a woman doesn't. Why do women look down at themselves if they want sex, and really think they are whores if they do? It's the same old Puritan ethic and men thinking it is a man's world and they own a woman's sexuality.

Don't take this as talking about all women or girls that are like this, I've been around a lot and long to know it isn't true, and even those that do still look down at themselves because society does, not because I do. I don't even look down at prostitutes, even though I think it is disgusting, that men, or women, would pay for sex. When a person is desperate they can almost do anything to survive, I realize this, but do other people. It seems that it is OK for a man to seek different sex partners and not for a women, something that gays and bisexuals know only too well.  We are all sex objects, and that is just the way it is, whether society agrees or not. And why is this considered wrong---the Puritan ethic based on religious dogma---resulting in pedophilia and other sexual perversions like, S&M, rape, and even ones that aren't, like lesbianism, and homosexuality, or even masturbation. Keep the cards and letters coming, even if this is just an opinion piece.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: wbuentello on June 12, 2015, 09:37:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
she made her point quite well, men don't often think with the big head when the little one is stiff and ready. If you don't want to have sex, maybe you should not get naked and crawl in bed and start rubbing against the guy..you know?  I mean really…I can tell you I have no fucking intention of getting naked and getting into bed with a gal I don't want to have sex with…why is this so hard with women? It has been proven pretty well by now that this is not a great situation to put yourself into.
Holy $h!t! Is this person serious or is this the village troll...
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: wbuentello on June 12, 2015, 09:49:54 PM
This is some really misogynistic shit. Weak minded, weak willed, ego sensitive men are the ones who take this stance. "How dare she call it quits after we are naked and besides once it's out I can't control myself" stfu! Maybe she figured out you needed a bath... I've figured out a chic needed a bath at least once after we were naked and called it quits. If you can't say no or accept no then your a victim and a slave to your own emotions and desires. If you're one if these maybe you need god in your life after all
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 12, 2015, 10:03:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Humans have impulse control. When a man "goes on" without consent in bed, he is doing that because HE FEELS ENTITLED TO DO IT. Not because he can't stop  and go away, but because he chooses to. There is nothing else behind it, but people like you who think this is normal.

You are basically saying that rape is OK under some circumstances, and you will support the rapist. This is what is called rape culture. And also why it is defined by male  culture.

Oh and it has nothing to do with "mankind being advanced yada yada". You simply think it is OK for a man to rape a woman in some position because you don't think that's rape. And that's what most rapists feel. They don't think what They do is rape either.

There is really nothing much to say or discuss with your post.You support rape culture and think men have a right to rape women under some  circumstances and you think it is some New Age shit to call it as what it is. It is called Rape. Simple as this. Doesn't matter how you try to sell it.

You are suggesting that the idea that someone should be cautious about their sexual adventures is an excuse for rape, I have not suggested that. I have at all times agreed that the good lady is mostly correct in her suggestions that people should not crawl into bed and invite sex and then demand it stop at anytime of her or his desire and expect positive outcomes. Her assertions are correct about human behaviors, our demands that we "should not" do that is irrelevant to the common behavior.

You are welcome to dance around shout all you want about what we should and could do, but that is completely irrelevant to what human behavior seems to show us and despite all our grandstanding it appears….by the court cases that our assertions that we are better than that, may not indeed be true.




 















Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 12, 2015, 10:04:52 PM
A chick? Really? Just because a person agrees with Dr. Ruth doesn't mean they think it is OK to rape a woman that says no, only that a lot of men do just that, and it is a bad practice for a women enticing a man to the point of nudity and putting themselves in that position. I don't think anyone here thinks it is OK to rape a woman who says no. I sure hope not.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 12, 2015, 10:08:05 PM
Quote
Has anyone here even suggested that it was OK to screw a girl or woman if she says no?

Yes, several times, when people said that a woman who says no or stop is a cock tease, terrible human being who kinda has it coming (ie deserves) the consequences ( unwanted sex).

That's about as blatant defense of rape as you can get, and several people have said those things already in this thread, which is quite disturbing. The only excuse is that it is culturally acceptable for us to think that rape is ever the victims fault, and it is painfully common mindset in our culture...
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 12, 2015, 10:08:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
A chick? Really? Just because a person agrees with Dr. Ruth doesn't mean they think it is OK to rape a woman that says no, only that a lot of men do just that, and it is a bad practice for a women enticing a man to the point of nudity and putting themselves in that position. I don't think anyone here thinks it is OK to rape a woman who says no. I sure hope not.
Oh stop it Solitary, why, you are ruining the self-aggrandizing that some love to posture about.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 12, 2015, 10:14:26 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Holy $h!t! Is this person serious or is this the village troll...
quick question oh bastion of…er…whatever you are…exactly how often  do you crawl into bed and get naked with women that you do not want to have sex with? Are they little girls? Are they big ole fatties? What it is about you that would make you want to get naked and crawl into bed with women you don't want to have sex with? Really! I find this absolutely freaking fascinating.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 12, 2015, 10:25:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oh stop it Solitary, why, you are ruining the self-aggrandizing that some love to posture about.
I'm sorry, I was just out of control, and glad you said it and not me, if you know what I mean.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: wbuentello on June 12, 2015, 10:25:50 PM


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
quick question oh bastion of…er…whatever you are…exactly how often  do you crawl into bed and get naked with women that you do not want to have sex with? Are they little girls? Are they big ole fatties? What it is about you that would make you want to get naked and crawl into bed with women you don't want to have sex with? Really! I find this absolutely freaking fascinating.

Oh I wanted to have sex, no doubt but you assume that once I've got into bed with her I can't stop and say, "wwhoa!!, this is a bad fucking idea, she smells like a fish market". Are you serious?! I know you are though... Oh well...
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: stromboli on June 12, 2015, 10:32:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think the term "cock tease" really, really sucks. It implies a sort of entitlement to a woman's body, for one thing. I had that term used on me when I was young and not ready to have sex. It made me feel like there was something wrong with me.

So I was bad if I was a cock tease. I was a slut if I had sex, too, though. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

We are one fucked up culture.

That being said, I have been in that situation where I was naked in bed with someone and I said no to sex. It was a long time ago so I do not remember all the fine details, but I am guessing the reason I said no is as such: I wanted to have sex with him, but I didn't want to be a slut.

It is NEVER OKAY to assume you can go there without consent.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think the term "cock tease" really, really sucks. It implies a sort of entitlement to a woman's body, for one thing. I had that term used on me when I was young and not ready to have sex. It made me feel like there was something wrong with me.

So I was bad if I was a cock tease. I was a slut if I had sex, too, though. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

We are one fucked up culture.

That being said, I have been in that situation where I was naked in bed with someone and I said no to sex. It was a long time ago so I do not remember all the fine details, but I am guessing the reason I said no is as such: I wanted to have sex with him, but I didn't want to be a slut.

It is NEVER OKAY to assume you can go there without consent.

Did not mean to insult with that term, but in fact if you spend time in clubs or bars, especially where dancing is involved, there are women that will deliberately goad men into sexual arousal and then either shut them down or make claims that they were trying to rape them. Regardless of how offensive you might find that, it is a reality. I have seen it and I have known men that have been victimized by it. Men in heat tend to think with their dicks, sad to say. There are women that do it. My personal belief is that these are women that have grudges against men, no different than guys that play women, who are smooth talkers and then will find ways to humiliate them or belittle them. Again I've seen it and know men that have done it.

And yes, there are definitely men that label women as cock teases and so forth, but that doesn't change the fact that there are women that do that. I don't agree with either side of it, but it happens. It is an ugly reality of human behavior.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 12, 2015, 10:36:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

 she smells like a fish market".

what the fuck?  What kind of whacko turd are you?  No where did I ever say that a guy can't stop. Can you read the english? Can you? Quote where I said it was okay to rape someone…come on fucktard, quote me.

My position has been the same for 40 years, Dr Ruth has nothing to do with it. I don't give a fuck what your secondary position is, if your primary goal was to get fucked, and then you changed your mind in mid stroke, DO NOT BE FUCKING SURPRISED IF THE PERSON GETTING FUCKED OR DOING THE FUCKING DOES NOT SHARE YOUR FUCKING FEELINGS! Its not that hard son. Simple idea here, I mean it is really a simple idea… the best way to avoid this type of behavior is to not get in bed and naked with people you really are not sure you want to have sex with…how hard is that? I have never crawled into bed with someone I didn 't want to have sex with..who many times have you?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 12, 2015, 10:45:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Did not mean to insult with that term, but in fact if you spend time in clubs or bars, especially where dancing is involved, there are women that will deliberately goad men into sexual arousal and then either shut them down or make claims that they were trying to rape them. Regardless of how offensive you might find that, it is a reality.

Even if "professional" cock teases are as commonplace as you seem to think it is, so what? It still sounds as though you believe they deserve whatever is coming to them for behavior you find frustrating. I'm sorry if some woman out there really raked you over the coals with skimpy clothes, doe-eyes, nudity and rape allegations, but don't hold the entire female gender responsible for the actions of an individual. Just like I would rather be optimistic and don't think all men would force themselves upon me if I laid naked in a bed with them.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: wbuentello on June 12, 2015, 10:54:25 PM


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have never crawled into bed with someone I didn 't want to have sex with..who many times have you?

If you aren't insinuating that you can't say no once you're in bed then what the fuck is your point of saying this multiple times? I never have either but wtf does that have to do with anything?! Okay so she gets pissed off, and she did, but still what does that have to do with anything? I never said no one should get upset but I may have implied that it's childish to be upset that she turned you down. Maybe you're assuming that these people are getting into bed with no intention of sleeping with the other person. Who cares! Get upset then put your big boy pants on and step!
I also see you like to live vicariously through your online persona, slinging personal insults from the safety of you're screen... Needless to say the effect was less then impressive.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 12, 2015, 11:00:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

 slinging personal insults from the safety of you're screen...
You started it fucktard. All I did was suggest that getting naked and crawling into bed with a person and initiating sex with them and then asking them to stop may not end up with the desired result. I suggested, as I always do, on the basis of personal responsibility is to decide you want t have sex BEFORE you get naked an crawl into bed with someone.

But I see you think differently..what do the goats say.. or do you bother to even ask them?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 12, 2015, 11:08:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

 Okay so she gets pissed off, and she did,

I missed that. I think we all understand now. You have my sympathies. Sorry for being mean.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: wbuentello on June 12, 2015, 11:34:23 PM


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

But I see you think differently..what do the goats say.. or do you bother to even ask them?
Maybe once when I was young... I don't bother anymore.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: stromboli on June 12, 2015, 11:35:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Even if "professional" cock teases are as commonplace as you seem to think it is, so what? It still sounds as though you believe they deserve whatever is coming to them for behavior you find frustrating. I'm sorry if some woman out there really raked you over the coals with skimpy clothes, doe-eyes, nudity and rape allegations, but don't hold the entire female gender responsible for the actions of an individual. Just like I would rather be optimistic and don't think all men would force themselves upon me if I laid naked in a bed with them.


And right now you jumped to the conclusion that I was calling every woman a cock tease, when I clearly didn't. And as I said, I have never been victimized in that way because I am a smart man that doesn't think with his dick. And I did not hold the entire female gender "responsible" and you are making statements that are vastly blown out of proportion. I was raised by a single mother and have great respect for women and I am deeply offended that you have labeled me as some kind of judgmental brain dead moron. The simple fact is that there are women that play men and there are men that play women, that is a reality. I never made a generalization at any point that women in general are anything.

If that is the kind of outlandish, overblown responses that I am going to get from you I am not answering any more posts. I am deeply offended and you have obviously labeled me without cause. So carry on with your tirade, I'm done.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: AllPurposeAtheist on June 12, 2015, 11:56:41 PM
Aside from the obvious about hopping in the sack with someone right away there are plenty of reasons to be careful,  disease just one of them,  but there are plenty of men and women alike who seem to think it's their jobs to go forth and multiply and whoever the victim is is just tough shit. You get to be either the mommy or the daddy and the law seems to go right along with that preplanned game of parent making.  It's usually women who hung out to dry, but there are plenty of men who with one night of fun get the great honor of paying child support for a minimum of 18 years,  sometimes more.
This is why I'm happy to be of a certain age where most of the women I might go to bed with are past the age of being able to bear children.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 13, 2015, 05:55:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are suggesting that the idea that someone should be cautious about their sexual adventures is an excuse for rape, I have not suggested that. I have at all times agreed that the good lady is mostly correct in her suggestions that people should not crawl into bed and invite sex and then demand it stop at anytime of her or his desire and expect positive outcomes. Her assertions are correct about human behaviors, our demands that we "should not" do that is irrelevant to the common behavior.

You are welcome to dance around shout all you want about what we should and could do, but that is completely irrelevant to what human behavior seems to show us and despite all our grandstanding it appears….by the court cases that our assertions that we are better than that, may not indeed be true.

I am not dancing around anything. I am going very straight. You are confusing human behaviour WHICH CAN BE MODIFIED, WHICH WE ALREADY HAVE MODIFIED countless times, with some sort of unstoppable, uncontrollable instinct or drive that cannot go back after a switch. This is bullshit. The common behaviour is the way you describe, because all the scoial norms and sexual culture are telling MEN that it is OK that if they don't stop at some point, because it's the way they are 'wired'. They are not 'wired', they are CONDITIONED to feel ENTITLED. Nobody is 'wired'. It's an obsolete idea. Every day science is telling us how much impressionable puppets we are and how getting aware of something; gaining consciousness about something CHANGES things.

We humans are not some 'animals' that needs a season or specific biological conditions to breed. We have sex, when we feel like to have it. We choose. A man doesn't just get turned on by me because I am ready to be impregnated at that moment. Our sexual affairs are very different than other animals.

Look around. Remember how it was when you were a young man, aitm? Why it is not like that anymore? Why there is a great difference between the understanding of rape of 20 years ago and now? People knew what was consent thousands of years ago. What changed? We keep modifiying human behvaiour constantly by raising awareness and telling No,no,no'. Can you imagine this issue being a common topic in 1970? Or even in 80s or 90s?

Now in the West, women who are sexually assaulted in some way come out more, -also it has started over here recently- because they are aware that the more people do that it changes things, more people uderstand that rape is NOT someting that needs special circumstances to occur but it is likely to happen at everywhere at all times in some way. Everyday more people get that almost all rapists are not some Holywood sexual sadist or a psychopath stereotype, but just ordinary men; they are husbands, boyfriends who acts along with the bullshit they grew up with.

The human behaviour is human behvaiour, because we are effecting it, shaping it, changing it constantly. We are rewarding or punishing it, so making the norms AND that's how human acts.

If you teach boys that they are in control of themselves and their own body, that they can always choose, that their partner can say NO at ANY time and that's just SOMETHING VERY SIMPLE LIKE SPILLING COFFE on THEIR SHIRT and NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR MANHOOD, THEIR WORTH, you'd be amazing how this bullshit would start to change in time. It would save both genders from a lot of bullshit that is likely to end in serious situations. 

But what we are doing all around the world? We are teaching boys that

-he who fucks the most pussy is the champion
-shit happened, someone got raped? Oh boys will be boys, she shouldn't have done 'insert bullshit here' (my favourite)
-they are entitled to come after they got an erection, because they have a cock and that's how cocks work
-it is something embarrassing and humiliating to be sexually rejected by a female and that means they are worthless, less of a male
-females have a sexual power over them and they should get it anywhere they can with anyone possible, because that's what men do
-males are fucking morons that would do anything to get into a pussy, so they cannot be held responsible of some consequences
-if a girl is enjoying sex openly, she is a 'slut' and should be targeted first and rejection by a 'slut' is the worst one
-ıf a girl is acting very comfortably, sexually agressive, she is a 'cock tease'
-there are girls to fuck and girls to get marry
-if  a girl is drunk or dressed in revealing clothes she is asking for rape,
-it is OK to rape when there is 'temptation' and 'provocation' because then it is not rape

We can go a miles with this. Would you like to hear about what we are teaching to girls? All that bullshit^AND THEN SOME.

--->Overall, we are teaching boys that there are circumstances they are not responsbile for their actions, because they are heterosexual males.

[Do you guys remember that a couple of years ago I posted something happened in the US with a few football players and a girl who was raped by them, but NOBODY came forward although they were witnesses, because EVERYONE AGREED that with one way or another she DESERVED what hapened to her, that boys in question were 'good athletes' loved in town, that she was drinking with them and probably she was asking for it.]

The root of the idea is the same. The heterosexual male should be excused under some circumstances, because he has a penis.

aitm, I think you know all this bullshit. It feels like you have this approach to gender issues and sexual norms that operates under the idea it's based on concrete norms -what you think is natural- of human reality that cannot be changed or that if it is, man won't be man and women won't be women. After I have read yor post -the one I have answered- I have remebered what you have written about a thread I posted about US army rape epidemic cuple of years ago. That was consistent with this one. You said something like "When they put women in with men in camps in combat area, people are bound to get 'stabbed'. Remember?

It's very important to being able to distinguish what can be changed in that human reality and social norms are the best we can because it depends on what you CHOOSE TO DO and teach your children. This is goes on ONE on ONE. It developes by the change in INDIVUAL BEHAVIOURS and REACTIONS. It's what you, me, she, he make of it. That's the basis of personal responsibility. Individual level. Personal responsibility doesn't disappear during sex when you got naked and jump in to bed. Neither consent.

We modify human behaviour  all the time. That's how we come this far.

But if you come to me with this:

Quote
Yeah, sorry, I am one of those guys that if you say you got raped and you were naked in a bed shoving some guys dick into your snatch, I have a hard time standing on your side of the table.

You are defending rape culture from a heterosexual male standpoint. And you are the one dancing around it, refusing to call it rape, the spade a spade.




















 
Title: 'Cock tease'
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 13, 2015, 06:12:21 AM
Are any of the guys who are speaking of this 'cock tease' aware that they are speaking of some behaviour of women who are sexually agressive, comfortable AND just acts differnet than the general female norm in most men's heads and so get labeled just then and there as a 'cock tease' by the men those women REFUSE?

Do men call the women with same behavioural pattern a 'cock tease' when they end up with them in bed?

No, they don't. Because women become a 'cock tease' for men AFTER they refuse to 'give it to them'.

It's another way of denying a simple rejection most men cannot handle. 'There is nothing wrong with me or my manhood, she is just a fucking 'cock tease'. 'That's on her.'

Another mechanism created, so the heterosexul male ego wouldn't take any 'bruise' and be able to blame the female for any negative result in sexual affairs he is entitled to rule.

PS Look it some male posters here. They claim they didn't have anyyone who wanted to stop the during sex, save a one certain situtation may be, but they are all talking about some big 'cock tease' issue, as if they have lived through it right and left all their lives. Why, because all men are talking about it, they are told that's the thing with some women. They see some women 'acting' like that. Like what? What is a cock tease to one man and to the other? Noone knows. After all they are women, who knows those 'evil pussies' are capable of.

 :rotflmao:
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 13, 2015, 08:27:47 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I am not dancing around anything. I am going very straight. You are confusing human behaviour WHICH CAN BE MODIFIED, WHICH WE ALREADY HAVE MODIFIED countless times, with some sort of unstoppable, uncontrollable instinct or drive that cannot go back after a switch. This is bullshit. The common behaviour is the way you describe, because all the scoial norms and sexual culture are telling MEN that it is OK that if they don't stop at some point, because it's the way they are 'wired'.

Exactly. If I get mouthy with a man, is it acceptable if I am punched or slapped in the face because, you know, men are naturally more aggressive and testosterone and <insert lame biological excuse here supported>? Of course it's not acceptable and I'm not suggesting that you think it should be, but you're suggesting that I shouldn't be surprised. Poor men! They just can't help how they were made!

These attitudes toward sex and women on an atheist forum truly do shock me. You may say they're rooted in biology, but they've also been largely supported by shitty old religions.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 08:34:58 AM
Out of all that this is what I picked up:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Overall, we are teaching boys that there are circumstances they are not responsbile for their actions, because they are heterosexual males.

My stance is, and has been: Overall we should be teaching our girls that they are responsible for their behavior, just like guys are, and the consequences of those behaviors may not play out to your liking, just like guys.

Do we tell our daughters don't worry about getting in bed and then asking the guy to stop because he always will? No, we ask our daughters to make sure they want sex before they initiate it.

You prattle on as if the modification of human behavior you are so proud of has already happened when it has  not.  So while we continue to work on that, I suggest that women be aware that asking guys to stop fucking them during the act may not play out as they want it to.

You however seem to want to champion stupid behavior. You want to suggest to people that it is perfectly okay to be fucking stupid and someone else will protect you from your stupidity.

When the behavior of males has "progressed" as you hope it will, then congratulations. Until then, I am teaching my granddaughter that the odds that a guy is going to stop having sex with her just because she ask him to, is not good. It would be far smarter and safer to make sure you want to have sex before you get in bed with him.  You suggest, "don't worry, he'll stop" Yeah, you're the bastion of intelligence there gal.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 13, 2015, 08:36:45 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The issue of consent in the process of intercourse is a whole different beast from consent before intercourse, because now you've got instinct getting in the way of that all-important prefrontal cortex's ability to do higher reasoning. I can't speak to the female side of the equation, but if a man is in the throes, you can't get him to stop masturbating unless you do something to scare the living daylights out of him, much less actual intercourse. It's not a fully voluntary action at that point.

Having sex with someone and masturbating are two completely different things.

When you have sex with someone, you'll see you are aware of all her reactions to what you are doing and the lack of it, any change of course, rythm, reaction. 

So actually in intercourse, people tend to be more aware of themselves, what they are doing, because they are not doing something alone to themselves. It's a team work.

When I am masturbating, I don't need to pay attention to anything else than my pussy. It's a passive toy, I directly engage without any introduction or doubt, I know how to play with it. I know where it is, that's enough. When I am with a man, we go together, start from somewhere-go through an introduction, different phases, I need to be responsive, also active, watch him and get what he likes or don't at that moment; also what I do like or not. That's automatic. It's very easy to recognise.

Unless you just started to come at that moment, a very short process we call orgasm, you are able to stop if you chose to. Even then we are able to draw ourselves back consciously, but yes, the orgasm will be wasted and won't reach it's upmost potential. Yeah it sucks. That's all.

I am sure you know that sometimes when also masturbating, even though you feel very horny and lustful and do everything right, it just doesn't explode the way you want? But it just goes up a little and stays there without reaching the top? And you go, 'eeh shit'. Yeah, just like that.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 08:40:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Of course it's not acceptable and I'm not suggesting that you think it should be, but you're suggesting that I shouldn't be surprised.

ah, yes. Insulting someone to his/her face and suggesting that there will be no consequence because there should not be one…very smart of you. Let me know how that works out.

Hey gang, I declare right now that every action will have exactly the re-action you desire because you claim, "it should happen the way I want it to! Woo-Hoo, let's throw up the banner that human behavior has been modified to our liking and we no longer have to work on that!
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 13, 2015, 09:09:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Out of all that this is what I picked up:

My stance is, and has been: Overall we should be teaching our girls that they are responsible for their behavior, just like guys are, and the consequences of those behaviors may not play out to your liking, just like guys.

Do we tell our daughters don't worry about getting in bed and then asking the guy to stop because he always will? No, we ask our daughters to make sure they want sex before they initiate it.

You prattle on as if the modification of human behavior you are so proud of has already happened when it has  not.  So while we continue to work on that, I suggest that women be aware that asking guys to stop fucking them during the act may not play out as they want it to.

You however seem to want to champion stupid behavior. You want to suggest to people that it is perfectly okay to be fucking stupid and someone else will protect you from your stupidity.

When the behavior of males has "progressed" as you hope it will, then congratulations. Until then, I am teaching my granddaughter that the odds that a guy is going to stop having sex with her just because she ask him to, is not good. It would be far smarter and safer to make sure you want to have sex before you get in bed with him.  You suggest, "don't worry, he'll stop" Yeah, you're the bastion of intelligence there gal.

No, I haven't suggested such a thing. When did I say anything like "we should NOT teach our daughters to act responsibly, oh I am sure it will turn out good by itself?!" Does that really sound like something that could get out of me?

'Fucking the stupid' is a very large, conformist expression. A woman wanting to go to bed with a man for just one night is fucking stupid? She doesn't want to get marry or even get to know him, but just fuck him. The 60 yr old men got in jail for fucking a 13 year girl who looks like 19 because they didn't even think of asking her age, were they fucking stupid? People picking up strangers from bars and clubs just to fuck for the night, sober or drunk, are fucking stupid? A young man who didn't know that the girl was 14 years old looking way older over 18 when he fucked her with her consent is fucking stupid? People are not perfect, it is highly likley they will make mistakes. That's why it is important to draw basic principles and be conscious to follow them WHATEVER happens and teach this to the youngsters.

I concentrated on male behavioural pattern, because it is supported and defended without considering the other side -instead constantly blaming her- on some made up conditions. This issue is about the perception of heterosexual male sexuality than fucking the stupid or being safe.

I have said this is a progress in time. Not something 'achieved' or 'happened'. There is no past tense accomplishments (-ed) in these subject. It's a constant shaping, something that will go on and on and on. I said 'look how far we come, we wouldn't be able to if it wasn't possible', THEREFORE we can go further. We just need to unlearn and learn again. Raise awareness.

But if we approach and react to this shit with "yeah well you got naked and jumped into bed with him darling, so you can't tell him to stop, sorry, he'd go on, he is a man" bullshit, then we are supporting rape culture and excuse men to rape, not to take any responsibility and give them a licence. And the cycle goes on. That NEVER means we shouldn't teach girls to be careful. However this is something more han girls being responsible or careful.

Because, I reiterate, physically they are able to stop, everyone can and it is just about bothering to be conscious about it, modifying your behaviour, choosing to do it and NOT feeling entitled to go on. And that is something individuals should work on, something that will change by individual struggle. One by one. That's very important. It's something we, people will do by ourselves.

The main unerstanding has to go, then teaching boys and girls will work in time.

Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 09:26:10 AM
I think this horse is dead, lets change gears and get into the finer arguments of punishment then eh?

Should rape be a single classification?

Is tackling a gal in a parking garage, punching her and then raping her the same punishment as a guy who was asked to stop just before he ejaculated?

If a gal guides a mans member into her because he is clumsy and excited and then they do the hibbity jibbity for a minute or so and then the gal starts thinking about jesus looking down on her and says "stop", is rape that last 10 seconds of him not stopping or do you go back to the point where she willingly guided the penis into her lady parts as the beginning?

Do we ascertain a percentage of who and what part of the act is rape and what part is consensual, or do we come to ask ourselves, "do I want to put this man in jail for 10 years because he didn't stop the last 10 seconds of a consensual sex act up to the point of that last 10 seconds"? I know what you may say DS, and I will say the opposite.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mr.Obvious on June 13, 2015, 10:12:19 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I am not dancing around anything. I am going very straight. You are confusing human behaviour WHICH CAN BE MODIFIED, WHICH WE ALREADY HAVE MODIFIED countless times, with some sort of unstoppable, uncontrollable instinct or drive that cannot go back after a switch. This is bullshit. The common behaviour is the way you describe, because all the scoial norms and sexual culture are telling MEN that it is OK that if they don't stop at some point, because it's the way they are 'wired'. They are not 'wired', they are CONDITIONED to feel ENTITLED. Nobody is 'wired'. It's an obsolete idea. Every day science is telling us how much impressionable puppets we are and how getting aware of something; gaining consciousness about something CHANGES things.

In my previous post, I stated that if one of the (potential) sexual partners at any time, even during sex wishes to call it quits, it's the other partners obligation to do so. As soon as consent dissapears, you can't keep having sex without it turning into rape. And I stand by that. Man or woman, doesn't matter, because rape isn't a gender-issue. It's an issue. And in that post I tried my best to keep it as genderneutral as possible, for that reason. Because rape is a violation of basic human rights; it should be looked at from an egalitarian point of view.

I you start bringing gender in the equation, it most often leads to dysfunctional shouting matches. And gender doesn't have to be brought into it at all. I disagree fullheartedly that men in Western culture are being conditioned to feel entitled to getting some. I don't believe Western culture is a 'rape culture' as some claim. As a Belgian, I can only speak for my own country. And subjectively, I will add. However, as someone with a master's degree in sociology, I will state that I have yet to find decent quantifiable evidence that rape is being promoted, swept under the rug, excused or belittled on a societal level in the larger Western Culture.

Quote
But what we are doing all around the world? We are teaching boys that

-he who fucks the most pussy is the champion

I've actually never been taught that. Nor would it, if I were, be a part of rape-culture necessarily if we actually were teaching them that. Not as long as we would also be teaching our children to respect the will and mind of others and to respect boundaries. Which we do, in fact, teach. And which most people, being social, emotional and somewhat rational creatures, come to accept and utilize.

Quote
-shit happened, someone got raped? Oh boys will be boys, she shouldn't have done 'insert bullshit here' (my favourite)
I've never heard this line or anything like it uttered by anyone I know in response to being told of someone being raped. The only time I hear something like this is in discussions about rape, most often by those insisting rape-culture is present in Western societies.

Quote
-they are entitled to come after they got an erection, because they have a cock and that's how cocks work
Actually, I've always been taught that you can only have sex or sexualy tinted actions if the other person you plan on having them with knows about this and is consenting. I've never been taught that my erection entitles me to a discharge. And no-one I know in my environment has ever given me any reason to think they were taught this strange lesson.

Quote
-it is something embarrassing and humiliating to be sexually rejected by a female and that means they are worthless, less of a male
Actually, it's more fair to say that being rejected, both sexually or not sexually, is embarrassing and humiliating. That's not something that I've been taught. That's inate to human behaviour, both for males as for females. If you want someone's approval, love, friendship or body and they say no; that stings. that's normal. And yes, being cognitive creatures we'll ponder on this and it will gnaw at our self-esteem. But no. I've never been institutionalized to think this way.

Quote
-females have a sexual power over them and they should get it anywhere they can with anyone possible, because that's what men do

I don't really understand what you mean with this one.

Quote
-males are fucking morons that would do anything to get into a pussy, so they cannot be held responsible of some consequences
If someone had ever tried to teach me this, I'd have told him/her off for it. We aren't. But we are also not taught we are. And we are not taught that we can't be held responsible for our consequences. I and everyone in my school and everyone in the schools of my friends and families has been taught that our actions have consequences and that we should keep them in mind. We've also always been  taught what rape is and that it's bad.

Quote
-if a girl is enjoying sex openly, she is a 'slut' and should be targeted first and rejection by a 'slut' is the worst one
Never been taught this myself. I'm not saying there aren't people out there who use slut as a derogatory term for women who enjoy having sex or have had sex with multiple partners. Surely there are, and I even suppose it's a widely spread and used term for this even though it's not all that much from where I'm from.
I'll agree that promiscuity can be looked down upon, but in my experience this also goes for men. One of my best friends is what we call him a 'manwhore'. A few of my friends over the years have actually been guys that were a lot more 'succesful' at getting laid than me and some other friends. We sometimes called them manwhores, but in jest.
I've never called anyone a slut, that I can recall. And those who I know have used the word as an insult because they were angry with the girl because they'd just broken up or something. Is slut really used as a way to describe someone in a casual conversation in America? Because I've only had it come up in a heated argument, I think, and even then not much.
What I guess I'm trying to say is that we are taught what the meaning of 'slut' as a word is. And we are also taught that it is a bad word, not to be used lightly if at all. But we are also taught, at least in my experience, not to judge someone on their sexuality or sexual activity; that these matters are the private affairs of this person in question. Kind of like; a person that doesn't dare to takem any risks is seen as 'a pussy'. But we're not taught to actively think of people that don't take risks as pussies.

Quote
-ıf a girl is acting very comfortably, sexually agressive, she is a 'cock tease'
See the above I suppose.
By the way I think people in my environment and me would use the term surefooted or confident. I always thought cock tease was a word used for someone who you are attracted to, but who isn't intent on allowing you to have sex with that person.

Quote
-there are girls to fuck and girls to get marry
No. We are taught that it's okay to date someone or have consensual sex with someone and that if the relationship doesn't work out or the sex doesn't go beyond a one-night stand or something, that's okay too.

Quote
-if  a girl is drunk or dressed in revealing clothes she is asking for rape,
Boys are not being taught this at all, not in Western societies. You question this through a survey in a Western country; I guarantee you boys overwhelmingly reply she isn't asking for rape.

Quote
-it is OK to rape when there is 'temptation' and 'provocation' because then it is not rape

See the above.

Quote
--->Overall, we are teaching boys that there are circumstances they are not responsbile for their actions, because they are heterosexual males.
In reliable surveys throughout the Western world, most people understand what rape is and that it's bad. We look at rape as something horrible, disgusting and just plain terrible. Heterosexual males, like other groups, overwhelmingly disagree with rape. There is no indication that they are taught that just because they are heterosexual or just because they are male their sexual actions don't require consent.

Now I'll state again that rape is horrible.  But the answer isn't 'teach boys to respect women and not to rape'. Because we already do that. We know not to rape. We know what rape is. We know it's bad. We know we need consent. We are taught rape is wrong. Just like murder, violence, lying, stealing, ... We are taught these things are bad. It's in our culture to teach rape is bad. We have laws to unsure rapists get punished. We, as a culture and as societies, think rape is wrong. But alas, it's not something that will ever completely dissapear, I fear. Like murder... Like stealing... And that's not to say we should fighting stop these issues. But saying we live in a rape culture that promotes and encourages rape doesn't help one bit.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 10:32:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As soon as consent dissapears, you can't keep having sex without it turning into rape

and herein lay the problem. What to you determine the "rape" to be? Is it fucking someone for 10 minutes after they said stop when you already fucked for 20 minutes, (just teasing, I can't last four minutes anymore)?  Is the rape for the last 10 seconds? Is it just the ejaculate she calls the rape part? If we charge a guy for rape, when the beginning of the act was consensual, can we charge the partner as an accomplice to rape as the initiator eh?  Hmmm, what fun.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 13, 2015, 10:49:14 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/soM0KMv.gif)
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mr.Obvious on June 13, 2015, 10:57:17 AM
Quote from: aitm link=topic=7882.msg1078512#msg1078512
Is it fucking someone for 10 minutes after they said stop when you already fucked for 20 minutes?
Yes. Exactly.

Quote
If we charge a guy for rape, when the beginning of the act was consensual, can we charge the partner as an accomplice to rape as the initiator eh?
No. Back then there was consent.

Failing to see The problem.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 13, 2015, 10:58:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
ah, yes. Insulting someone to his/her face and suggesting that there will be no consequence because there should not be one…very smart of you. Let me know how that works out.

So you would really suggest that a man hitting a woman for talking back to him would be an appropriate response because men are wired for that? It's sad that you don't think more highly of your capacity to control yourself.

All you're doing in this thread is making yourself look like an ass and trying to split hairs over what rape should be. Rape starts when consent stops. Period. That includes being too young, too drunk, and/or too mentally incompetent to consent.

If a bipolar, 13 year-old girl who is high on pills gets naked and hops into bed with a 30 year old man, by your own claim she shouldn't be surprised if sex ensues, since she's a little "cock tease" and it's been made clear that men can't help themselves when "women" lead them on.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 13, 2015, 11:13:52 AM
I'm so glad the woman and girls I have had sex with actually wanted to and owned their sexuality instead of women's lib men haters. I've never had a woman say no to me, and the ones I called cock teasers were just that, and any man with half a brain in his head would know before he ever got in bed with them naked. Should they be raped, hell no! But rape is not about sex, but control of women, just like men hating women that like to control men, and then claim rape when they started the encounter. Are all women like this? No! Have women that are like this been abused or raped, most likely yes, but some have daddy issues.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mermaid on June 13, 2015, 11:18:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm so glad the woman and girls I have had sex with actually wanted to and owned their sexuality instead of women's lib men haters. I've never had a woman say no to me, and the ones I called cock teasers were just that, and any man with half a brain in his head would know before he ever got in bed with them naked. Should they be raped, hell no! But rape is not about sex, but control of women, just like men hating women that like to control men, and then claim rape when they started the encounter. Are all women like this? No! Have women that are like this been abused or raped, most likely yes, but some have daddy issues.
I...I just...


This leaves me speechless.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 01:11:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Failing to see The problem.

so, we should charge the guy who fucked a gal consensually for 10 minutes and charge him with rape for the 10 seconds after she said no, with the same crime as the guy who tackles a woman, punches her in the face and rapes her in an ally?
I think I am beginning to understand why you fail to see the problem.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 01:23:58 PM
I want to get back to this. Seriously, I think this has more interesting points.
If a women invites a man to her house, invites him to bed, guides his penis into her vagina…and openly admits this in court…and then changes her mind and they guy continued for another 20 seconds…how much of "rape" is there? Is this a percentage problem? Is she guilty of being an accomplice to the crime?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No. Back then there was consent.
Back then there was consent….back then she helped perpetuate the crime…she is an accomplice to a rape that she facilitated, a condition that did not exist without her involvement.
ac·com·plice
əˈkämpləs/
noun
a person who helps another commit a crime.
synonyms:   partner in crime, associate, accessory, abettor, confederate, collaborator, fellow conspirator, co-conspirator; More

I find this rather interesting. Now see if you can put yourself in the mans position of being charged with the capital crime of rape when 95% of the act was consensual.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 01:28:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So you would really suggest that a man hitting a woman for talking back to him would be an appropriate response
Your comprehension shows you're a retard or a moron. If you can't comprehend the sentence, don't bother replying, you opened your mouth and removed all doubt. (its an old saying you should probably look up but I doubt you could understand it)
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 13, 2015, 02:08:01 PM
Wow! Just wow, does anyone here think for a second that what was common, and still is, means that men here accept that kind of rhetoric just because we brought it up showing why it happens to women that go so far to be naked in bed, or even start having intercourse and say stop? Once a man ejaculates it is a little late to say stop and then call it rape. Once a woman starts having sex with intercourse, sodomy, or cunnilingus and says stop it isn't rape by any definition. A man should stop of course, but to call it rape that can put a man in jail is crazy.   
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mr.Obvious on June 13, 2015, 02:53:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
so, we should charge the guy who fucked a gal consensually for 10 minutes and charge him with rape for the 10 seconds after she said no, with the same crime as the guy who tackles a woman, punches her in the face and rapes her in an ally?
I think I am beginning to understand why you fail to see the problem.

Don't put words in my mouth, aitm. I don't much appreciate that.
Maybe i'm mistaken, but nothing i said came close to having that as an appropriate response.

But let me try to give you my view on The matter, since you brought it up. Is a murder as bad when comited without prior intent as bad as a some serial killer who planned out his kill in advance? I'd like to think not. I'd like to think prior intent makes something worse. Same for rape. But at The end of The day there is still a crime. Still a victim. And there has still been a violation of someones rights. If you want there to be a different degree of punishment: you can definitely make a case for that, go ahead. But if someone wants their sexual partner to stop and that partner doesnt, after being made clear The partner wants him/her to stop; yes that becomes rape.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I want to get back to this. Seriously, I think this has more interesting points.
If a women invites a man to her house, invites him to bed, guides his penis into her vagina…and openly admits this in court…and then changes her mind and they guy continued for another 20 seconds…how much of "rape" is there? Is this a percentage problem? Is she guilty of being an accomplice to the crime?
Is The Guy clear she wants him to stop these 20 seconds? If yes, The 20 seconds are 100% rape. Trying to make an equation out of how many seconds were consensual and how manynot is missing The point utterly. There is no percentage problem.

This all being said, good luck getting a punishment for this hypothetical crime. How would you prove it? (Another reason why indeed it is best to know in as soon as possible advance if you are going to want to keep having sex or not.) But At no point in time does consent stop mattering.

Quote
Back then there was consent….back then she helped perpetuate the crime…she is an accomplice to a rape that she facilitated, a condition that did not exist without her involvement.
ac·com·plice
əˈkämpləs/
noun
a person who helps another commit a crime.
synonyms:   partner in crime, associate, accessory, abettor, confederate, collaborator, fellow conspirator, co-conspirator; More
Sex with consent is not a crime. Ergo, via your own definition, no accomplice. When consent stops, The situation changes. Do you not agree?

Quote
I find this rather interesting. Now see if you can put yourself in the mans position of being charged with the capital crime of rape when 95% of the act was consensual.
Terrified of going to jail and walking around with The label of sex offender for The rest of my life . That was easy.

Your turn; put yourself in The position of a man who has been having consensual sex for ten minutes. You're plowing into this girl and have a good vibe going. Suddenly she Asks you to stop. You think you misheard. Bewildered, you ask 'what'. She repeats herself, pleading this time, begging even. There is no possible mistake; she wants you to stop. Would you not stop? Are you telling me it is okay to keep plowing in this situation? What kind of deviant do you have to be to even concider keep doing this to this begging, Crying woman beneath you?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 03:32:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Is a murder as bad when comited without prior intent as bad as a some serial killer who planned out his kill in advance?
Excellant point! Does a man have prior intent to rape when a woman tells him she wants to fuck him? Helps him shove his dick in her? Where is the intent? Is this really "ejaculatory rape"? What do you think the punishment for that would be?



Quote
This all being said, good luck getting a punishment for this hypothetical crime. How would you prove it?

Exactly! This is why society does not normally toss a man in prison for rape when a gal objects to "finishing" what she started.
Quote
But At no point in time does consent stop mattering.
And I continue to agree with that as I have all along, however, expecting someone to stop because you think they should is a mighty dangerous supposition don't you think?

Quote
When consent stops, The situation changes. Do you not agree?
Of course, but is the getaway driver of a robbery as guilty of murder when he changes his mind after someone is killed and leaves? Yes, he helped facilitate the crime. So did she.

Quote
Your turn; put yourself in The position of a man who has been having consensual sex for ten minutes. You're plowing into this girl and have a good vibe going. Suddenly she Asks you to stop. You think you misheard. You ask 'what'. She repeats herself, pleading this time, begging even. There is no possible mistake; she wants you to stop. Would you not stop?
I would stop of course, as I have said one should do the entire course of this thread. However as this has never happened to me or perhaps you or perhaps anybody in this forum it becomes wishful speculation. Sure I think I would stop, but as I have never experienced that situation I cannot say I could, but most certainly we hope any man would.

Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 13, 2015, 05:29:45 PM
I will always say stop first in any liaison, now since it is such a great way to frustrate horny women and charge them with rape if they don't listen. Has this ever happened?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 06:45:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I will always say stop first in any liaison, now since it is such a great way to frustrate horny women and charge them with rape if they don't listen. Has this ever happened?
You know Sol, sometimes I get the very real feeling that we are arguing with people whose closest experience to a pussy is smelling their sisters underwear. They have no idea of what the grasp of the real scent can do to a man. No idea! And they blame us of course when they shasay that sweet thing in our face….dangle it, entice it, grab our cock and shove it in and do that dirty dance of the sheet…and suggest we can and should stop at their very word.

Well of course we should!

( I had to separate that line because a certain retarded fucktard can't comprehend whole sentences yet)

I have no argument with that.

Other than of course, I have never been asked to and don't really know if I can. But hey! Plenty of men here implied they have done it dozens of times so it must be possible. Therefore I will not instruct my granddaughter to ignore the traffic!

YOU HAVE A PEDESTRIAN LANE. THEY MUST STOP FOR YOU. GO AHEAD CROSS THE ROAD!

THERE IS A LAW AGAINST ASSAULT! GO AHEAD, TELL THE FUCKER TO GO FUCK HIMSELF YOU IGNORANT MOTHER FUCKING NIGGER! NOTHING WILL HAPPEN TO YOU, ITS AGAINST THE LAW!!!

GO AHEAD, STICK THE GUYS DICK IN YOUR SNATCH, WIGGLE AROUND FOR A COUPLE MINUTES, WAIT UNTIL HE IS ABOUT TO COME THEN SCREAM TO STOP..DON'T WORRY HE WILL, IT'S THE FUCKING LAW!!!!

Yeah.. and we are called ignorant.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 13, 2015, 07:37:06 PM
...what the fuck?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mr.Obvious on June 13, 2015, 07:43:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Excellant point! Does a man have prior intent to rape when a woman tells him she wants to fuck him? Helps him shove his dick in her? Where is the intent? Is this really "ejaculatory rape"? What do you think the punishment for that would be?
I'm not saying that person had prior intent. I'm saying he didn't. However, this, as you agree further down your post, does not excuse that person from not stopping when asked to stop and knows (s)he's been asked to stop. Meaning it's still a bad thing; still rape and should still idealy be punished.
As to the actual punishment; I won't presume to judge; as I am no judge. Also I have never heard of the term 'ejaculatory rape' and can't seem to find a definition for it online. For punishment: I don't know what it would be. I could partake in a conversation about what it should be. But decisions to laws of punishments and to find someone guilty are usually, I find, better left in multiple pairs of hands than one.
But I get the impression, and mind you this is just my impression, that what you seem to say in this and previous postss boils down to: it would be rediculous to put a case like this before court. You wouldn't be able to defend it, let alone prove it. My point is only that not stopping when asked to stop is rape and therefore a bad thing that 'should be' punished, regardless of wether it actually will be or not.

Quote
Exactly! This is why society does not normally toss a man in prison for rape when a gal objects to "finishing" what she started. And I continue to agree with that as I have all along, however, expecting someone to stop because you think they should is a mighty dangerous supposition don't you think?
Evidence is important and necessary in any case. (Innocent until proven guilty.) You won't hear me state otherwise. However, what I'm getting at is that a person that, borrowing your vocabulary, 'forces the gal to finish what she started when she doesn't want to' deserves punishment. And if the evidence is there, the perp should get punished.

Dangerous supposition? It's more 'dangerous' the later in the process. No doubt. However; doesn't shift the blame one bit. Because a realization that this is not something that person wants can always come later in the process. I hope my metaphore bellow helps show that.

Quote
Of course, but is the getaway driver of a robbery as guilty of murder when he changes his mind after someone is killed and leaves? Yes, he helped facilitate the crime. So did she.
You start off with a crime in your metaphore, making it, I personally suspect, intentionally difficult to say the getawaydriver isn't guilty of something. I'd like to offer a different, and I humbly think better, one.
Let's forget about 'crime' for a second. But let's keep the car.

Jack has a car and is driving down a long road. He has to go miles and miles to visit someone a few cities over. Jack is lonely, dying for some company. The music in the radio, though sometimes uplifting, just isn't giving him enough social interaction. Lo and behold, he sees a hitchhiker. Thinking it over, as the opportunity for some interaction approaches, he decides to take a chance and pulls the car over to the side of the road. Gleefully the hitchiker runs over and introduces himself; Mark. Mark seems like an okay chap and is even headed in the same direction. Jack offers to give Mark a ride and invites him into his car. Things start of well, the first few miles. It's pleasant; Mark compliments Jack's choice in music; the enterior of his car, his outfit. Swell, Jack thinks, I really hit the jackpot with this. But then Mark starts saying some unpleasant things. Not necessarily aimed at Jack, mind you. Let's say, for argument's sake, that Mark sees an immigrant on the side of the road and starts saying how immigrants are ruining this country. Jack, however, doesn't agree. He voices this, but Mark doesn't let up. He becomes increasingly racist and bigotted in his remarks to a point that Jack finds himself infuriated with Mark. He asks Mark, be it politely or not politely, to can it and that he doesn' want that kind of talk in his car, but yet Mark continues. Eventually Jack pulls the car over and tells Mark to leave. Mark refuses, saying Jack offered to give the entire ride and that he wants the entire ride.
Is Jack entitled to put Mark out of his car? I think yes, and I think most people, including yourself, I gather from your notes further down your  reply, would agree. Would the situation be reversed, by the way, and the hitchhiker wishes to leave the vehicle and Jack refuses to let him go; Jack would be in the wrong. Even though both consented, at the start, to share the ride, moment one of them finds it too unpleasant to keep on driving and travelling together; the other is obliged to accept the demand for their separation. No matter how much one party finds it to be a dick-move. Would it have been less awkward if Jack had concidered this outcome before inviting Mark into his car? Sure. But this in no way excuses Mark from not leaving the car at the demand of it's owner. This much to metaphore consent and how it changes.

Now to introduce 'crime' and 'associates' to try to show why your view on them is odd to me.
Let's say that at this point Mark becomes hostile. We could take this hypothetical situation into the direction of fysical violence or doing damage to the car to build a metaphore to how violent rape can be, but let's not here. Let's state that Mark, angered by the fact that he's being asked to get out (and perhaps doesn't understand why he's being asked) tries to take the wheel and manages to put his foot on the accelerator; making the car go further down the road. At this point Mark is doing something very illegal. Does this make Jack an associate to Mark's crime? He let him into the car, but didn't know it would turn out this way; with Mark refusing to get out of the car and forcing Jack to drive further down the road. Can we hold Jack accountable for this 'half-carjack'? (Or whatever you would call it?) Sure, one can make the case that Jack should've known better than to pick up a stranger and give him a ride. One might say 'that's just begging for trouble'. But do we blame Jack? I hope we wouldn't. Do we think Jack is an associate to Mark's misdeed? I don't.  And I don't think many would. Do we see Jack, who doesn't want Mark in his car anymore and who's lost control over his car and is in a terrified position, as someone who instigated or helped facilitate a crime? Personally I don't understand how you could.


Quote
I would stop of course, as I have said one should do the entire course of this thread. However as this has never happened to me or perhaps you or perhaps anybody in this forum it becomes wishful speculation. Sure I think I would stop, but as I have never experienced that situation I cannot say I could, but most certainly we hope any man would.
I too have stated earlier in this thread that I'd like to think I would, but perhaps that it is easy for me to say; never having been in the situation (and hopefully never being). Because, like you seem to agree, it'd be wrong to continue. That's basically all I've been saying. Personal accountability is important, I agree, but there's always at least two in a consensual sexual relationship. And anyone can try and argue that it's up to your own personal accountability that you should be certain that you want sex before crossing some threshold. But this being a 'relationship' implies the other(s) too has or have accountability and responsibility. And not stopping when someon wants you to stop is failing that accountability and betraying that responsibility.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 08:23:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Meaning it's still a bad thing; still rape and should still idealy be punished.
I agree, but the term of this is where we are getting sticky. I suggest to a degree that holding one 100% responsible for a "crime" that is only 10% their fault is non-justifiable.


Quote
As to the actual punishment; I won't presume to judge; as I am no judge.
oh my friend, we all are judges. This is the whole of the jurisprudence system


Quote
Dangerous supposition? It's more 'dangerous' the later in the process. No doubt. However; doesn't shift the blame one bit.
Does it? Does running wildly though a crosswalk in traffic with a baby carriage excuse the driver who does not see her? No. Does it grant her immunity? Does the imprisonment of the driver justify the death she subjected her child to by believing the law protected her assumptions?



Quote
Now to introduce 'crime' and 'associates' to try to show why your view on them is odd to me.
Let's say that at this point Mark becomes hostile. We could take this hypothetical situation into the direction of fysical violence or doing damage to the car to build a metaphore to how violent rape can be, but let's not here. Let's state that Mark, angered by the fact that he's being asked to get out (and perhaps doesn't understand why he's being asked) tries to take the wheel and manages to put his foot on the accelerator; making the car go further down the road. At this point Mark is doing something very illegal. Does this make Jack an associate to Mark's crime? He let him into the car, but didn't know it would turn out this way; with Mark refusing to get out of the car and forcing Jack to drive further down the road. Can we hold Jack accountable for this 'half-carjack'? (Or whatever you would call it?) Sure, one can make the case that Jack should've known better than to pick up a stranger and give him a ride. One might say 'that's just begging for trouble'. But do we blame Jack? I hope we wouldn't. Do we think Jack is an associate to Mark's misdeed? I don't.  And I don't think many would. Do we see Jack, who doesn't want Mark in his car anymore and who's lost control over his car and is in a terrified position, as someone who instigated or helped facilitate a crime? Personally I don't understand how you could.
I must admit this is a wonderful analogy if it was appropriate. Really it is a great argument if was reasonably similar to sexual encounters. I argued your point of prior intent of a rapist. If the car-jacker had prior intent then obviously no we can't blame the poor driver, like wise we can't blame a poor women who stumbles into a man intent on raping her, which so far has not been any part of the argument. Next comes, when consent stops the situation changes, and I agree, but you are suggesting that at one second a mutual act is not a crime at all and in the nanosecond later a crime has been committed simply because of a moral change of attitude and indeed this is not even a moral change of attitude as it may be a frivolous one. And by frivolous I very mean that you think we can now imprison a man because a woman perhaps thinks jesus doesn't want her to have sex and at that moment decides to ask a man to stop.

Quote
But this being a 'relationship' implies the other(s) too has or have accountability and responsibility. And not stopping when someon wants you to stop is failing that accountability and betraying that responsibility.

I agree and likewise would suggest that accepting ones accountability and responsibility is to acknowledge ones role in the whole of a situation where you may have purposefully misled a person into a situation that you now demand they extract you from.

Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: AllPurposeAtheist on June 13, 2015, 08:28:18 PM
I'm sorry Spanky, but I have to live my own life. ..
https://youtu.be/MxIiJC9nDdQ

Sorry folks, but I can no longer take this thread as serious as it once was. .
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 13, 2015, 09:24:43 PM
C'mon APA it's starting to get fun. Hell I even got Shir getting all pissed off.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 14, 2015, 06:22:24 AM
Mr.Obvious

You realise that you are just telling me -Also Hijiri I guess- that

'I am not like this, I wasn't raised like this, personally I don't know this and that you have said AND we know and teach that rape is wrong and that should be enough.' Really? So we teach people rape is wrong, so that should be enough? How on earth I didn't think of this?! You are brilliant. (Sarcasm)

Quote
But saying we live in a rape culture that promotes and encourages rape doesn't help one bit.

And why is that? Because I am not being politically correct and pointing my finger at a certain culture defined by a certain gender and his culture, which is male? Are you offended? Disturbed? Felt uncomfortable? Aw.

You should read about that 'rape culture' I am talking about and learn why is it called a rape 'culture'. And why it is important to stop talking with a politically correct language about this issue.  You have some -politely put- naive notions on the issue that teaching rape is wrong, that everyone knows rape is wrong somehow should make a difference. You know that we also teach people stealing, killing are wrong, right? That doesn't change things one bit.

You also have the general western convictions that where you live, as a culture rape is held with a different view. No, it is not sweety, like many other issues. The sooner you get rid of that delusion, the better is for you. Rape is the same everywhere in the world. 

You, most men in this forum, almost all men in the thread, most men in the world are OFFENDED by this issue being defined by male culture. That's the problem. Also the main problem lies BEHIND that rape culture. Heterosexual male ego society builds in men from childhood. You refuse to step out of it, get your heads out of your asses, stop being offended and say 'yes something is wrong with how boys are raised up, how we are conditioned to see the heterosexual male sexuality, there is an accepted entitlement of het male sexuality that comes with ugly consequences, that should change'. Do you have any idea how that would make men's sex lives easier oo?

None of you are that stupid. You are perfectly aware what is going on. You choose to be blind and willfully ignorant about this, because it is disturbing and offensive to you. You instantly turn in to whining babies or get agressive to support your football team. Well tough, it is not going anywhere. It's real.

And I am sick of this thread, talking to a bunch of men children who is reacting like somebody made a caricature of their muhammeds. You need to grow up.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 14, 2015, 06:44:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
...what the fuck?

Well, it is not just with talking to religious people you feel like playing chess with the pigeons. Tiring isn't it? Feeling embarrassed on behalf of other people when they cannot even begin to see what is actually going on, worse, refusing to see just to support their team.

Still my favourite ground for this bullshit is nationalism more than gender issues. Oh sorry, patriotism. It's like walking through pigeon lofts in a churchyard. :lol:


Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 14, 2015, 07:17:11 AM
LOL…..oh my….this has indeed been funny. Thanks Dr. Ruth for the good stuff. Of all the regular posters in this thread I am positive of only 4 actually having had sex with a woman, Solitary, APA, myself and Shoe. And of the 4 voices only the female declares with certainty that she understands how a man will act. Thats some rich stuff there.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 14, 2015, 08:35:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LOL…..oh my….this has indeed been funny. Thanks Dr. Ruth for the good stuff. Of all the regular posters in this thread I am positive of only 4 actually having had sex with a woman, Solitary, APA, myself and Shoe. And of the 4 voices only the female declares with certainty that she understands how a man will act. Thats some rich stuff there.

This is bullshit in the nutshell. How a 'man will act' is determined by the entitlement given to him. We are saying they shouldn't, because it is NOT something they can't help. There is no biological base for it. Men will act that way, because they choose to. Because they are told that it is OK from the point of their het male sexuality.

You declare that there is a certain way "a man will act" and say that women should accept this, obey to it, because they will, because they are men. Buuuullshit.

And who do you expect will object to this bullshit if not women? Do you think that entitlement is just something they face in bed? It talks to you that people here strongly object to something are all women, but not the ones spewing the same bullshit are all HET MEN?  :think:

Besides, Shiranu is a man. And if we think we have members trying to evaluate this situation by the point of masturbating that 'it is very difficult to stop' he perfectly counts as a support. And he is not a heterosexual man, so that's a big heads up to you if you get it. 

PS I have made out with a woman and kissed another one. I haven't had sex with any. I'll give my report if I do.



Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 14, 2015, 09:00:32 AM
This is my take on this.  We live in a man's world--literally.  I cannot think of a large society of any type in today's world where that is not so.  Men rule in almost any category one can think of.  My grandfather is the first one I remember pointing this out to me--and I listened to him.  So, all the rules of society are such they benefit the male part of the population; especially the sexual rules.  Men are allowed to act much more boldly and much more forcefully than the females.  Rape has little, or nothing, to do with sex.  It is about control and wielding of power.  Women use guile and physical charm and men use power and position in the area of sex.  Yes--all that I have said so far is a gross generalization and I meant it to be so--I'm talking about societal type things in general.

On a personal level, my wife and I can each initiate sex.  We can both stop at any point (and we have) without incurring any hurt feelings.  There are many reasons to start--and many reasons to stop.  And stop does not mean the other will never get it again.  It is just a postponement.  Or maybe a change in delivery--we may continue in a different manner.  Whatever, we both trust each other, so there is not problem.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 14, 2015, 10:07:53 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm sorry Spanky, but I have to live my own life. ..
https://youtu.be/MxIiJC9nDdQ

Sorry folks, but I can no longer take this thread as serious as it once was. .
Stop it APA your killing me, and I have to clean my monitor again.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 14, 2015, 10:08:43 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is my take on this.  We live in a man's world--literally.  I cannot think of a large society of any type in today's world where that is not so.  Men rule in almost any category one can think of.  My grandfather is the first one I remember pointing this out to me--and I listened to him.  So, all the rules of society are such they benefit the male part of the population; especially the sexual rules.  Men are allowed to act much more boldly and much more forcefully than the females.  Rape has little, or nothing, to do with sex.  It is about control and wielding of power.  Women use guile and physical charm and men use power and position in the area of sex.  Yes--all that I have said so far is a gross generalization and I meant it to be so--I'm talking about societal type things in general.

Yes, that's why men think it is OK to go on in bed during sex when they are told to stop, while they can, and that it is not rape if they do, because in that position they are entitled to get their way, because they have a penis.

And society, everything from media, to movies, people -including women, because they are raised in the patriarchal rules too- telling them they have a 'right' to do this in different ways. Becaue they are men.

There are many things they are in a position to exploit. And most men perfectly KNOW this, but adamantly refuse to accept it. They attack feminists -as if you need to be feminist to see or object to this bullshit- and call anyone who says this out loud, man hater, femicunt, feminazi...etc. 

The male hypocrisy on this is astonishing. It's right out fascistic.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 14, 2015, 10:24:13 AM
Yes, it is astounding.  I have been astounded all my life by that fact.  And I raised my daughter to understand this concept as well.  Not all men buy into it, though.  But to suggest change will be swift and deep is a pipe dream.  It will change--but ever so slowly.  This male dominance comes from religion, but not exclusive of it.  It spills over into the nonreligious as well.  It is a complex subject and is woven very deeply in our societies. 
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 14, 2015, 10:33:31 AM
 For DS---So we men here think it is OK to force ourselves on women because we live in a male dominated society according to you? Are you nuts, no male here has even suggested that, only that woman that put their selves in that position in such a society are either prick teasers, or really really stupid.  What would you do in the throws of an orgasm with a girl fucking you and you said stop and she didn't think of her? Did she rape you just because you said stop?  You sure do like to generalized that the men here are part of the problem of a rape culture even after we have pointed out that we think it is wrong to keep going when a woman says stop, and only think it is stupid for woman to get to the point of being naked in bed with a man and think by just saying no in such a culture he will stop. And as I have pointed out, rape is not about sex, but control, what many woman do to men that say stop just to show how horrible men are if they don't, proving "all" men are like that to support their man hating agendas.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 14, 2015, 11:03:59 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
snip
five pages of quotes where I never suggested any of the "bullshit" you keep making up as you go along. You've convinced yourself, what's left to do eh?

Quote
PS I have made out with a woman and kissed another one. I haven't had sex with any. I'll give my report if I do.
well we damn well hope so!




Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 14, 2015, 11:57:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
five pages of quotes where I never suggested any of the "bullshit" you keep making up as you go along. You've convinced yourself, what's left to do eh?

No, you were very pretty clear in the first post I have reacted. Go read it.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 14, 2015, 12:01:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes, it is astounding.  I have been astounded all my life by that fact.  And I raised my daughter to understand this concept as well.  Not all men buy into it, though.  But to suggest change will be swift and deep is a pipe dream.  It will change--but ever so slowly.  This male dominance comes from religion, but not exclusive of it.  It spills over into the nonreligious as well.  It is a complex subject and is woven very deeply in our societies.

Agreed. I know chnge won't be easy or quick as you said or deep at all. And thank you for not buying into this bullshit. There are a few others here that bullshit doesn't work on. For example, Shiranu. 

 
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: AllPurposeAtheist on June 14, 2015, 01:04:49 PM
Look folks,  the bullshit works on ALL OF US at some level whether we're aware of it or not.  Sitting in front of the computer or phone makes it really easy to sit and pretend we're all the enlightened people we like to think we are, but we all have to move along to the real world from time to time and confront lifes bullshit and it's not always so cut and dry, black and white the way it's so often made to seem online.
Sex is just one of lifes hypocrisies, but so is low wage, slavelike conditions our computers and cell phones are made in and yet each and every one of us is currently staring into a screen most likely made by low wage Chinese workers and nobody is railing against that as opposed to just tossing our devices in the trash.
We all know that the internal combustion engine is not good for the environment and yet I haven't heard to many of us ditching their cars in favor of the horse and buggy.
The list can go on and on and on. .
Nobody is rooting for rape to suddenly become legal so let's cut to the chase. .I'm not willing to shame anyone here for their views and I don't think anyone here has a beef with using a bit of common sense.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 14, 2015, 01:50:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Sex is just one of lifes hypocrisies, but so is low wage, slavelike conditions our computers and cell phones are made in and yet each and every one of us is currently staring into a screen most likely made by low wage Chinese workers and nobody is railing against that as opposed to just tossing our devices in the trash.
We all know that the internal combustion engine is not good for the environment and yet I haven't heard to many of us ditching their cars in favor of the horse and buggy.
The list can go on and on and on. .

I see what you're saying, and I'll agree that I'm not without my own hypocrisies. However, these arguments you point out put us all in the same offending group. Us versus them.

If this forum had a lot of Chinese sweatshop workers on it trying to explain why they feel it's unfair that they're being exploited and we were all here telling them to deal with it, because that's how the world works, and if they really wanted to they could change themselves by finding some way out of an oppressive system of poverty, because we're not going to change, that would feel closer to what's going on here.

Because as a woman, when a bunch of men tell me to deal with it, because that's how the world works, and if I really wanted to they could change myself by constantly scrutinizing my clothing, behaviors and choices and NEVER making a mistake, because men not going to change, that makes me feel like men are more interested in accepting date rape as immutable fact of the world that they shouldn't bother to address, but should accept.

Sort of like the religions they spend countless posts on this forum hating on.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mermaid on June 14, 2015, 01:55:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I see what you're saying, and I'll agree that I'm not without my own hypocrisies. However, these arguments you point out put us all in the same offending group. Us versus them.

If this forum had a lot of Chinese sweatshop workers on it trying to explain why they feel it's unfair that they're being exploited and we were all here telling them to deal with it, because that's how the world works, and if they really wanted to they could change themselves by finding some way out of an oppressive system of poverty, because we're not going to change, that would feel closer to what's going on here.

Because as a woman, when a bunch of men tell me to deal with it, because that's how the world works, and if I really wanted to they could change myself by constantly scrutinizing my clothing, behaviors and choices and NEVER making a mistake, because men not going to change, that makes me feel like men are more interested in accepting date rape as immutable fact of the world that they shouldn't bother to address, but should accept.

Sort of like the religions they spend countless posts on this forum hating on.
Thank you for putting this into such eloquent words.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: the_antithesis on June 14, 2015, 03:10:38 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How many women get a kick out of getting a guy aroused and then say no for the fun of it? We used to call them prick teasers. Why would any woman lead a man on until they are naked in bed and say no unless she is being an ass? Would a guy do that?

I would.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 14, 2015, 03:31:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
At 1.3 sec., sure.  At 1.2, that I'm not sure about.
(http://cdn.meme.am/instances/250x250/55493946.jpg)
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: AllPurposeAtheist on June 14, 2015, 03:51:55 PM
I've seen nobody suggest that women should just deal with it  when it comes to rape and by the way women aren't the only victims of rape. If anything men are more likely to be told to just deal with it if taped...err..raped. I think what the issue is is whether or not people are using sense in respect to their sexuality. Many do not. That alone runs the gamut from being careful to plain outright stupidity.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 14, 2015, 03:52:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I would.
See, you are the problem, just ask any man hater.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mr.Obvious on June 14, 2015, 04:01:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I agree, but the term of this is where we are getting sticky. I suggest to a degree that holding one 100% responsible for a "crime" that is only 10% their fault is non-justifiable.

When person A asks person B to stop doing something and person B refuses, after being informed to stop, person B becomes responsible.
This is where I suppose your equation/percentage game comes in, as you bring up percentages again. But if 90% of the sex was consensual before it became nonconsensual, B isn't only responsible for 10% of the actual crime.
If your 10% was instead referring to person A running in front of a car on a road and person B driving that car and not stopping in time and that making it only 10% B's fault, I can at least see the logic. But there is a problem with that analogy and it took me a while to find the right words to point it out. Here goes.

At first sight I can see why the playing in traffic, jaywalking or running wildly or blindly through a crosswalk analogy would work. It would put the driver in a sudden and unexpected situation. Being asked to stop mid-passion surely is unexpected and sudden. But upon further inspections, I believe, problems arise.

A first problem arises when we realize that the pedestrian and the car driver, in this case, did not plan their activity together. There is no basic trust, there is no relationship between the two. The pedestrian just pops up out of nowhere in the example and is said to have been irresponsible in his/her actions. While sex, if it starts out with consent, is an action at least two partners agree to. It's 'a road they go down together'. The only way this analogy would work if the pedestrian asked the driver to run her over, to which the driver proceeds to try and run the pedestrian over and this pedestrian changes his/her mind last minute and then gets angry for the driver not stopping before running him/her over.

But maybe we can make this analogy work if we look at the responsible behavior we expect in two or more consenting adults to be the equivalent of the responsibility we expect of those who go into traffic as car-drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists, pedestrians… They all have a code they should know about and should follow. And everyone is asked to be responsible out there. But here we find the real problem: The important thing is that the pedestrian isn't, in reality, running into traffic wildly. If we take driving as the metaphore for the one partner having sex and walking as the metaphore for the second partner having sex, then at the time of consent we should look at both of them doing their respective metaphore responsibly.
The pedestrian has thought about how to walk, where to walk and how to do so responsibly. Like the driver he/she follows the code of the road and is doing his/her best to avoid accidents. The pedestrian getting caught in the driver's trajectory, therefore is not something intended beforehand nor is it something that can be prevented as such. The realization of the pedastrian that (s)he doesn't want sex is therefore not him/her changing course suddenly and jumping in front of the driver's car. Up to the point that the sex, aka the walk, was fine, there was no trouble.
A better analogy would be that, while crossing the road the pedestrian has a cramp and can't keep going and thus can't get out of the way or twists his/her ankle or even has a psychological black-out or something. The realization that one does not want sex anymore can be just as sudden and unexpected for the pedestrian as it can be for the driver. The realization is not in the pedestrian's control, but once it's there; it prevents him/her from walking. That's the point; the responsible and  pre-aproved walk is consensual sex; the unplanned problem is something that prevents the pedestrian from completing that walk.

We expect those who go into traffic to, when an accident or a problem occurs, to act responsibly and in time. If the car before me crashes and I didn't keep enought distance and crash into that car, I'm responsible for that second crash. I don't know how it is in America, but that's how it is here, and I believe it's a good system. Therefore, when I drive and a pedestrian crossing the road far enough away from trips, falls to the ground and can't get up and I fail to hit the brakes in time; that's extreme negligence on my part, and I deserve punishment for it. Things are different, I agree, if the pedestrian tries to cross the road, jumping from a blind spot, but a meter from my car when I'm going 60 on a road where I am allowed to go 60. But this hypothetical situation is not in line with the sudden change of mind that can occur within a sexual partner's mind, who up to that point has been just as responsible in traffic as I have. Do you understand what I'm saying?

The second problem is what we concider is the moment one should stop. And that's where our interpretations of het analogy differ, I think. It's a two part-problem
First part: In your previous posts you more than once, it seems to me, seem to suggest that you can't be expected to stop having sex the very nano-second that someone decides not to have sex. And I agree to the point that you can't be expected to the instant the realization in the pedestrian hits. The moment the pedestrian's ankle breaks, for example, you can't see (s)he's not going to be able to go on. However, soon the pedestrian falls or starts hopping; this is a clear signal that follows after the realization. In sex this clear signal would be the partner saying 'stop; I don't want this anymore, please stop'. Failure to act in a timely fashion to such a signal is a fault on the driver's part. The pedestrian can't do anything about it the moment the realization hits or the ankle breaks; so it's up to the driver to follow the code of the road and pull the brakes in a timely fashion.
Second part: Lies with how you, at least so it seems to me, incorporate the idea of prior intent into the analogy. Earlier we both agreed that prior intent makes things worse. And that still applies in this reformed analogy. It's worse if some driver stalks a pedestrian with the clear intent on running that pedestrian over. At least it's worse than if a driver sees a pedestrian, who is far enough away crossing the street but falls down and doesn't get up, and yet fails to hit the brakes in time or sway and thus ends up running over the pedestrian. Prior intent clearly makes this worse, though we still hold the driver accountable for his/her part in the accident. But prior intent being absent doesn't absolve us from responsibility in the here and now. One the one hand you sometimes seem to agree with me on this, but as you (below) make a very strange point about my previous analogy with jack and mark, I don't think you apply it properly. In the jack-mark analogy, you say that if mark had prior intent on forcing jack to take him along and to take the wheel and put his foot on the gas, then we don't hold Jack accountable. But what if it's a spur of the moment thing for Mark as well? What if he doesn't understand why he's being asked out of the car and he lashes out by forcing the car further down the road in that matter? Then somehow Jack becomes an accomplice, an instigator? That doesn't make sense. Same if in my revised analogy that I presented above; if the driver, who we assume to be a responsible driver who knows the code of the road and who knows to follow these rules, in the spur of the moment decides not to put his foot on the brakes or decides not to slow down or sway or try anything to avoid the collision; that still doesn't make the pedestrian with the broken ankle an instigator. Now in most cases the driver's decision wouldn't be to not slow down. I get that. Bar the occasional monster no driver would speed up either. But the lack of appropriate action during the critical moment does make it the driver's responsibility. It's a responsibility he/she accepted prior to getting into the car, aka having sex. Prior intent surely makes things worse, but one can still be responsible for hitting a pedestrian without it.

Quote
oh my friend, we all are judges. This is the whole of the jurisprudence system

Where I come from 'jurisprudentie', which I believe is a translation, refers to the entirety of the decisions and declarations made by actual certified judges. Not sure what your point is here.

Quote
Does it? Does running wildly though a crosswalk in traffic with a baby carriage excuse the driver who does not see her? No. Does it grant her immunity? Does the imprisonment of the driver justify the death she subjected her child to by believing the law protected her assumptions?
See above. The pedestrian can't keep the walk going, aka consensual sex, because of a problem (like a cramp or a broken ankle), aka a realization that makes one not capable of consenting to the sex anymore. To depict the pedestrian as an irresponsible person that doesn't follow the code of the road is a misrepresentation of the character that changes his/her mind in your analogy.

Quote
I must admit this is a wonderful analogy if it was appropriate. Really it is a great argument if was reasonably similar to sexual encounters. I argued your point of prior intent of a rapist. If the car-jacker had prior intent then obviously no we can't blame the poor driver, like wise we can't blame a poor women who stumbles into a man intent on raping her, which so far has not been any part of the argument. Next comes, when consent stops the situation changes, and I agree, but you are suggesting that at one second a mutual act is not a crime at all and in the nanosecond later a crime has been committed simply because of a moral change of attitude and indeed this is not even a moral change of attitude as it may be a frivolous one. And by frivolous I very mean that you think we can now imprison a man because a woman perhaps thinks jesus doesn't want her to have sex and at that moment decides to ask a man to stop.
See above why I think your analogy doesn't work.
And while I have next to no respect for religion; I'd like to point out that the reason for the 'woman' not wanting sex anymore doesn't matter. It matters that she doesn't want it anymore. I don't care if she believes Jesus tells her. I don't care if she believes the Dalaï Lama rode down on the invisible pink unicorn and declares that she shouldn't have sex and she goes with that. I don't care that it's because she's getting flashbacks or whatever reason that leads to a change of mind. Point is; mind has been changed.

Quote
I agree and likewise would suggest that accepting ones accountability and responsibility is to acknowledge ones role in the whole of a situation where you may have purposefully misled a person into a situation that you now demand they extract you from.
See above.

Also, to the other comment in which you say Drunkenshoe had sex with a woman and I haven't (because I'm counting myself as a regular poster in this thread). Really?
For the life of me I don't know why, aitm, but I thought you would be better than mudslinging.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: the_antithesis on June 14, 2015, 04:05:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
See, you are the problem, just ask any man hater.

I am quite a twat tease.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 14, 2015, 04:06:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think what the issue is is whether or not people are using sense in respect to their sexuality. Many do not. That alone runs the gamut from being careful to plain outright stupidity.

Ok, well, let me then ask this question of all the people who are suggesting that it makes sense that a woman who get naked in front of a man and gets raped should expect it. If you were in that situation, would you look her in the face and say "Sorry, no taksies backsies!"? I somehow doubt it. But acting like there are TONS of people who would perpetuates this idea that it's commonplace and therefore sort of expected. I'm more of the opinion that he's probably a rapist anyway and the the clothes/no clothes boundary is irrelevant. Like who decided that was the line? She took her clothes off, now it's a contract. What if she only gets her shirt off before she decides she doesn't want you as a one night stand? What if she only takes her shoes off at the door? Is that an open invitation?

I see a lot of people on here suggesting that there's almost no "good" reason a woman would get naked and then change her mind. Like the man in that situation is entitled to a good explanation for what gives. I think an explanation would be nice, but I don't think he's entitled to one, because suggesting that he is suggests that if she can't come up with something, then she owes him sex. That mindset reminds me a lot of politicians who want to look over welfare recipients' grocery bills and scrutinize every line item like "Oh, I see here you bought name-brand Cheerios. Not with my tax dollars!"

I remember the day my husband found out his mom died. We were dating at the time and about to get intimate. Needless to say after that phone call, we didn't. Granted, gender roles are reversed, but would that have been an acceptable excuse?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 14, 2015, 04:07:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
(http://cdn.meme.am/instances/250x250/55493946.jpg)
Okay--I assume you realize I was being sarcastic?   And I'm confused by the message.  Am I to fuck her correctly in the pussy?  Or am I to fuck her right (and nowhere else) in the pussy? 
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: the_antithesis on June 14, 2015, 04:12:57 PM
I can't imagine why someone would change their mind at that point.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 14, 2015, 04:13:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Okay--I assume you realize I was being sarcastic?
Yes.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
am I to fuck her right (and nowhere else) in the pussy?
Following from your sarcasm: yes.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 14, 2015, 04:20:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes.
Following from your sarcasm: yes.
Okay, thanks.  I now have my orders.  I look forward to proceeding.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: the_antithesis on June 14, 2015, 04:27:16 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I remember the day my husband found out his mom died. We were dating at the time and about to get intimate. Needless to say after that phone call, we didn't. Granted, gender roles are reversed, but would that have been an acceptable excuse?

I don't think that's the same as the original scenario in that you likely had a similar emotional reaction to the news. The original scenario, as I understood it, involved the other person simply changing their mind without the benefit of an external reason the other could be privy to.

So, to make your example fit, remove it. You and your husband are about to get intimate and he decides he doesn't want to. No reason. He just doesn't feel like it. Then what?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mr.Obvious on June 14, 2015, 04:42:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr.Obvious

You realise that you are just telling me -Also Hijiri I guess- that

'I am not like this, I wasn't raised like this, personally I don't know this and that you have said AND we know and teach that rape is wrong and that should be enough.' Really? So we teach people rape is wrong, so that should be enough? How on earth I didn't think of this?! You are brilliant. (Sarcasm)

I'm also saying that we shouldn't stop fighting to stop these issues. I'm just saying that 'teach boys not to rape' is already being implemented, just like 'teach not to steal' or 'teach not to harm' or 'teach not to kill'. And to demand something that's already taught be taught as if it's not already taught is a waste of energy, time and resources on top of treating one gender as if they are neanderthals that, after being taught something is bad, can't possibly be expected to just 'get it'.
We shouldn't stop teaching that rape is bad. I'm not saying that at all. But we are being brought up in a society that teaches us that rape is wrong. And guess what, you're right, that, like teaching not to kill or hurt or steal or lie, sinks in. People know rape is bad. Like these other crimes, however, they're not going to go away fully just because people know they are bad. Whenever someone gets killed, you hardly, if ever, hear 'teach them not to kill'. While I can see teaching not to kill can be an important factor in getting down the homicide rates, nobody yells this because we all know everyone is already being taught this. Why should rape be different? We know it's wrong, we have been taught it's wrong; stop implying we haven't been taught yet and that we somehow don't know this very easy to grasp notion.

Also, I can do without the sarcasm, if you don't mind.

Quote
And why is that? Because I am not being politically correct and pointing my finger at a certain culture defined by a certain gender and his culture, which is male? Are you offended? Disturbed? Felt uncomfortable? Aw.
Do I particularly enjoy hearing that the culture I gew up in is a 'rape culture' and that I've been indoctrinated and that just because I have a penis I'm somehow to brainwashed to see what's what? No I'll freely admit I don't particularly enjoy that.
But why it's really not helpfull is because you are painting a picture that isn't true. Or at least that I don't have any reason to believe is true. You put forth this claim that our culture is a rape culture. But I've never seen any quantifiable evidence, any reliable sources to support this claim. There are no statistics that I know of that prove that we as a society teach to rape, that rape is okay or that we think rape is okay. On the other hand I know of many laws, procedures and punishments that are in place and clearly show that we as a society think rape is something bad.

Quote
You should read about that 'rape culture' I am talking about and learn why is it called a rape 'culture'. And why it is important to stop talking with a politically correct language about this issue.  You have some -politely put- naive notions on the issue that teaching rape is wrong, that everyone knows rape is wrong somehow should make a difference. You know that we also teach people stealing, killing are wrong, right? That doesn't change things one bit.

You also have the general western convictions that where you live, as a culture rape is held with a different view. No, it is not sweety, like many other issues. The sooner you get rid of that delusion, the better is for you. Rape is the same everywhere in the world. 

I have read a little about 'rape culture'. I won't claim to be an expert. But I'll see to it that if I have some time to spare, I'll delve a bit more into it. If you can point me to a source that proves it rather than asserts it, I'd like that.

Also. I don't think I understand everything you said in the last paragraph. But it seems like you say I think we think of rape as something different? I'm not sure what you mean by this, and I'd ask you not to make such assumptions. Rape is rape. Rape is bad. Rape is bad in Belgium. Rape is bad in America. Rape is bad in China. Rape is bad in Africa. Does my opinion on this shock you?

Quote
You, most men in this forum, almost all men in the thread, most men in the world are OFFENDED by this issue being defined by male culture. That's the problem. Also the main problem lies BEHIND that rape culture. Heterosexual male ego society builds in men from childhood. You refuse to step out of it, get your heads out of your asses, stop being offended and say 'yes something is wrong with how boys are raised up, how we are conditioned to see the heterosexual male sexuality, there is an accepted entitlement of het male sexuality that comes with ugly consequences, that should change'. Do you have any idea how that would make men's sex lives easier oo?
Again, I admit it not feeling particularly good, as a heterosexual male, to be told that heterosexual masculinity causes society-wide oppression and rape. But that's not a problem if it's the truth. As of yet your claim that heterosexual male ego cause any of this is nothing more than assertions, however.

Quote
None of you are that stupid. You are perfectly aware what is going on. You choose to be blind and willfully ignorant about this, because it is disturbing and offensive to you. You instantly turn in to whining babies or get agressive to support your football team. Well tough, it is not going anywhere. It's real.
Again with the assumptions. All I ask is that if it's real, you show it with evidence.

Quote
And I am sick of this thread, talking to a bunch of men children who is reacting like somebody made a caricature of their muhammeds. You need to grow up.
An asserted claim that hasn't been backed up by anything but conviction and more assertions to me sounds a lot more like 'a muhammed' than me pointing out you just claim your idea to be truth and expect us to go along with it without ample evidence.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 14, 2015, 05:40:45 PM
I cant speak for Belgium, but coming from the country that exports more "culture" than anyone else, and is talked about more than any other country in the world... yeah, the United States definitely has a rape culture and I can see how we would make it seem like it's a huge problem in the West. I don't know the numbers for Europe so I cant speak for how prevalent it is or isn't over there. I can only speak from my experiences and use examples from people here...

I will use a couple of quotes from this article...

http://time.com/40110/rape-culture-is-real/

Quote
Is 1 in 5 American women surviving rape or attempted rape considered a cultural norm? Is 1 in 6 men being abused before the age of 18 a cultural norm?

Simply put, when 20% of women have faced being raped (the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted this study)... that is a rape culture. When 16.67% of men have been abused before 18, that is a violence/rape culture. This isn't some small minority, some 1-2% of people being raped... that is a combined 36.67% of Americans have been, or attempted to have been, raped or abused. And it's likely there is a solid number of people who refused to report it... so nearly 40% of Americans. Close to HALF of Americans have had rape been a part of their life in one way or another.

And that's not counting the number of people who know someone who has been raped...

Quote
The study, called the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, was begun in 2010 with the support of the National Institute of Justice and the Department of Defense.

...

Sexual violence affects women disproportionately, the researchers found. One-third of women said they had been victims of a rape, beating or stalking, or a combination of assaults.

The researchers defined rape as completed forced penetration, forced penetration facilitated by drugs or alcohol, or attempted forced penetration.

How is it possible to define this as anything less than sexual violence, if not rape? At BEST you can say the United States is a country rife with a sex-based violence culture, if not rape.

Quote
“If we already despise rapists, why are they so rarely held accountable in any way?,” Friedman asks. An analysis by RAINN found that 97% of rapists never spend a single day in jail for their crimes. “What we really despise is the idea of rapists: a terrifying monster lurking in the bushes, waiting to pounce on an innocent girl as she walks by,” Friedman says. “But actual rapists, men who are usually known to (and often loved by) their victims? Men who are sometimes our sports heroes, political leaders, buddies, boyfriends and fathers? Evidence suggests we don’t despise them nearly as much as we should.”

How do you define the unwillingness to hold rapists responsible for their actions as anything less than a rape culture?

Quote
-Rape culture is when women who come forward are questioned about what they were wearing.
-Rape culture is when survivors who come forward are asked, “Were you drinking?”
-Rape culture is when people say, “she was asking for it.”
-Rape culture is when we teach women how to not get raped, instead of teaching men not to rape.
-Rape culture is when the lyrics of Robin Thicke’s ‘Blurred Lines’ mirror the words of actual rapists and is still the number one song in the country.
-Rape culture is when the mainstream media mourns the end of the convicted Steubenville rapists’ football careers and does not mention the young girl who was victimized.
-Rape culture is when cyberbullies take pictures of sexual assaults and harass their victims online after the fact, which in the cases of Audrie Pott and Rehtaeh Parsons tragically ended in their suicides.
-Rape culture is when, in 31 states, rapists can legally sue for child custody if the rape results in pregnancy.
-Rape culture is when college campus advisers tasked with supporting the student body, shame survivors who report their rapes. (Annie Clark, a campus activist, says an administrator at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill told her when she reported her rape, “Well… Rape is like football, if you look back on the game, and you’re the quarterback, Annie… is there anything you would have done differently?”)
-Rape culture is when colleges are more concerned with getting sued by assailants than in supporting survivors. (Or at Occidental College, where students and administrators who advocated for survivors were terrorized for speaking out against the school’s insufficient reporting procedures.)

Besides it being said several times in this thread the first bold, the second one I bolded is the government actively saying, "RAPISTS, YOU DID NOTHING WRONG AND YOU DESERVE THE RIGHT TO SEE YOUR CHILD YOU POOR INNOCENT VICTIM!". How the fuck do you define that as anything other than a rape culture?

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH7OS5uJGkY[/youtube]



I don't want to make this post way to long, but ultimately...

Yes, rape culture exists. Maybe it doesn't in Belgium... but just because you are the exception to the rule doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And maybe it doesn't even exist in Europe, though I highly doubt that... while looking at some articles, it seems like the UK at least has some issues with it... and Italy and Spain certainly do as well, but they are also countries I would expect that from. While it may not be as prevalent as it is here in the U.S., Europe certainly does have these issues as well.

I have walked with female coworkers, through the middle of a college campus to their car, because they feared (several knew people who had been assaulted) for their safety. I know people who have been raped and nothing was done about it, that they were told they were asking for it. I have seen case after case where a woman is raped and the VERY FIRST QUESTION that is asked by anyone... the presenter, the guests, my family, society at large... "What was she wearing? Where was she? How was SHE the one who perpetrated the rape?". I have reasons besides just being a some-what decent human being to get pissed off when rape is defended that I don't want to, and don't plan on, ever talking about. So yeah, you managed to piss me off... woopty-fucking-do. You could also probably piss off a black man by calling him racial slurs and telling him to go pick your cotton, would you feel that's such a damned proud achievement too?

And yeah, I have never had sex... therefor, I guess I just cant understand what it's like to not stop fucking a woman when she says stop. I understand, you are caught up in passion. So was the guy who beat someone else's face to a pulp with a monkey wrench and stabbed him in the gut with a screwdriver multiple times... he was just caught up in the passion of anger. So was the woman who cut that guy's dick off and threw it out the car after she caught him cheating... she was just caught up in the passion of anger. So was the guy who had sex with a girl who was too young to understand the concept of no... he was just caught up in the passion of lust.

I have never raped a little girl or beat a man to death, so I guess I just cant understand what it's like to be so caught up in an emotion that you do something that hurts someone else. I guess that makes pedophiles and murderers okay then, because they were just caught up in their emotions and did something wrong while they were.

I mean seriously, what the fuck? Since when has, "I was emotional, judge!" even been a good excuse? But everyone here is so willing to jump on anyone who dare support Christianity because it makes them feel good... then emotions are fucking terrible, you fucking peasant, you are a fucking idiot tool knob sheep! But if emotions make you hurt someone... meh, you just don't understand.

It's one thing to be a hypocrite about a philosophy or religion, it's another to be a hypocrite in the defense of rape... which, in my sense of morality anyways, is a little bit more of a fucking issue than someone believing in god.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 14, 2015, 05:59:38 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
yeah, the United States definitely has a rape culture and I can see how we would make it seem like it's a huge problem in the West.
Yeah, I remember that time in sex ed when we were encouraged to rape people, or how during martial arts and psychology classes I was always encouraged to commit rampant acts of physical and mental abuse against people I'm close to. :V

I'm not gonna argue with statistics, but "rape culture" is the dumbest fucking term for it I've ever heard for it.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 14, 2015, 06:03:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah, I remember that time in sex ed when we were encouraged to rape people, or how during martial arts and psychology classes I was always encouraged to commit rampant acts of physical and mental abuse against people I'm close to. :V

I'm not gonna argue with statistics, but "rape culture" is the dumbest fucking term for it I've ever heard for it.

Playing intentionally moronic is not particularly becoming. I'm not sure what other term you could use for a culture that apologizes for rapists, that does not punish rapists, that blames the victims before the ACTUAL CRIMINALS. It's hard to define that as anything else than a culture that tolerates rape.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: the_antithesis on June 14, 2015, 06:08:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Simply put, when 20% of women have faced being raped (the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted this study)... that is a rape culture.

So if it were 19%, it would not?

If not, where is does this mine shaft it bottom? 10%? 5%? When?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 14, 2015, 06:21:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So if it were 19%, it would not?

If not, where is does this mine shaft it bottom? 10%? 5%? When?

What is with these fucking percentage games in this thread?

The number is simply one part of a huge problem, hence the reason that was only a section of my post. The point is a large percentage is being sexually assaulted, AND the common attitude is to find fault with the victim before the perpetrator, AND the fact that rapists get away scott free the majority of the time, AND we have a government that tells rapists they have a god-given RIGHT to their kids, AND the fact that...

If it was 10% and the above factors were still in play, yes it would be a rape culture. If it was 5% and the above factors were still in play, yes it would still be a rape culture. If it was 1% and the above factors were still in play, yes it would still be a rape culture. A rape culture is not just that the act is happening but that society tolerates it.

The fact that it's 20% of women are raped or attempted to be raped, as well as however many men, is simply one part of the equation meant to show how out of control the problem is. The percentage only makes matters that much worse and that much more needed to be addressed, it does not the rape culture make.

Seriously, I just don't get what this coy bullshit is about. No one is calling anyone here a fucking rapist. No one here is assaulting anyone's manhood, or saying that they support rape, or that we are terrible human beings. What is being said is that the society we were born into does promote victim blaming and that several times people in this thread have blatantly defended rape. Defending rape is not the same as supporting it, you can be completely against anything and still defend it without realizing it. And that's exactly what has happened... a umph-paged thread of shit-slinging about, "well... what is rape REAAAAALY? How do you REAAAAALY define rape? How can you not blame the victim because, I mean, she was asking for it!"?

That is defense of rape, and I don't believe for a second that anyone has said those things support rape in the least bit; I figure they are just as anti-rape as anyone else. But their mindset only promotes a society that doesn't give a shit about rape victims and the mental gymnastics and hypocrisy, and honestly just down right toxicity, that has been used to "prove they are right" puts any religious person who has come here to shame. 
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: the_antithesis on June 14, 2015, 06:37:11 PM
Then do not say things like "Simply put, when 20% of women have faced being raped, that is a rape culture" because it muddies the waters. It does because you then said that your quoted statement is not true. Simply put, the percentage of women who've faced being raped does not mater. Do not use percentages, then unless you want to confuse people if they focus on that part of your post. And if you think people won't or shouldn't, welcome to dealing with human beings. We fucking suck.

 
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 14, 2015, 06:48:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then do not say things like "Simply put, when 20% of women have faced being raped, that is a rape culture" because it muddies the waters. It does because you then said that your quoted statement is not true. Simply put, the percentage of women who've faced being raped does not mater. Do not use percentages, then unless you want to confuse people if they focus on that part of your post. And if you think people won't or shouldn't, welcome to dealing with human beings. We fucking suck.

 

No, otherwise rational people intentionally trying to weesle their way around an issue fucking suck, and that is not the average person.

If we took "AND the fact that rapists get away scott free the majority of the time" out of the post, does that mean it's no longer a rape culture?

What you just said is that if you take something out of the equation, it doesn't matter. So let's take that one above out... wait, look, it's still a rape culture!

I don't get why people are playing intentionally dumb as a bag of shit in this thread, but it's getting really old, really fast. The percentage matters in that, the higher it is, the worse it is (obviously). But even if we got that percentage to near zero, the culture itself is still a rape culture for all the reasons I posted and then some. But just like if you took rapists having custody of their kids out of the equation... that doesn't mean that it was therefor never an issue because it didn't fix the problem itself. Just like getting the percentage to near 0 wouldn't mean that it was therefor never actually a problem... IT IS ONE PART OF A FAR BIGGER PROBLEM.

This is why I have been trying to avoid this thread... you people are acting like a bunch of 10 year olds or Kirk Cameron or whoever defending their faith... just mental gymnatstics, and "NUH UHHHH, YOU DUMBIE HEAD LOLLOLLOL!".

It's getting really fucking pathetic, and you know what... if it was over what someone's favourite movie was, or is there a god, whatever... who the fuck cares? But over the fact that we live in a culture that is tolerant of people being fucking raped? Grow the fuck up. When I of all people am having to tell people to act like adults... jesus christ.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: the_antithesis on June 14, 2015, 07:34:46 PM
You first, kid. I mean, you are still posting in this thread, aren't you? I am as well but I am bored and uninterested in being a better person.

I think my main beef is with the term "rape culture." It's kind of like calling a cell phone a "brain tumor generator." As if this topic isn't emotional enough, we need a term like that meant to provoke. Not enlighten. Not educate. Not illustrate. Just provoke an emotional reaction. Because that's what we need. It's fucking helpful.

I don't know why this ballooned up to nine worthless pages or why Dr Ruth's original comments seem to be so controversial.

"I am 100% against rape. I do say to women if they don't want to have sex with a man, they should not be naked in bed w/him.

That's risky behavior like crossing street against the light. If a driver hits you, he's legally in the wrong but you're in the hospital."

I think the last sentence says it all. You can bang on for the rest of your life about rape culture if you want to, but you still have to live in the world that exists. Which means that if you do not want certain things to happen to you, you should modify your own behavior accordingly. If you don't want to get a sunburn, you don't sit out in the sun without wearing sunscreen. I don't see how this translates into blaming the victim unless someone is a complete narcissist. "But I don't want a sunburn." Then you should wear sunscreen and get some shade every once in a while. "But I shouldn't have to wear sunscreen. The sun shouldn't burn me." Rape shouldn't happen, but should's are a lousy form of protection. A guy should stop when a woman asks him to, but should's remain a lousy form of protection.

That and everyone is way to sensitive when it comes to sex. I mean, is rape the worst thing that can happen to a person? If so, then thank goodness my niece is dead from cancer so that will never happen to her. For fuck's sake.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 14, 2015, 07:53:52 PM
Right, well, I see you have missed everything said in this thread so far since you are arguing about something that was dispelled on the very first page.

Have fun with that then. I don't know why, when it comes to race, rape or gays... all of the sudden perfectly reasonable people throw all their brains out the door and becoming raging assholes and go through so many mental hoops to avoid grasping even the most basic of concepts, but every time one of those gets brought up here... bam, suddenly it's hard to believe certain people can walk and talk and become raging assholes in nothing flat. It's almost impressive, if it wasn't so depressing. If you really don't grasp how...

Quote
A guy should stop when a woman asks him to, but should's remain a lousy form of protection.

... is not victim blaming, saying that it's her fault for being so lousy at protecting herself and defending people who took it ever further than that, then whatever. You are part of a terrible fucking problem with society, but at least you're not alone... even here, where self-proclaimed rational people who are so smug in how much more reasonable they are than believers throw all that reason out the window and act like a pack of creationists defending their position when it is something they disagree with it... be it gun control, race issues, feminism, rape or what have you, what ever the flavour of the day is.

Quote
That and everyone is way to sensitive when it comes to sex. I mean, is rape the worst thing that can happen to a person? If so, then thank goodness my niece is dead from cancer so that will never happen to her. For fuck's sake.

Yes, how dare people be sensitive when it comes to being assaulted and molested. What a bunch of fucking pussies. Expecially when nearly half a country of 318 million people will face it in one way or another.

Quote
I think my main beef is with the term "rape culture."

Seriously, why the fuck is this so insulting to you, and several other people here? I just don't get why the fuck you take this so personally. There is nothing provoking about it, it is saying that rape is a problem in our culture. Are you a rapist? Do you believe rapists should be defended? If no and no, then there is no reason in all of fuckity fuckland this should be provocative to you. And then you follow it up by saying people need to be less sensitive... I just really don't grasp this. This is exactly what I am talking about... one second you are saying people need to be less sensitive, after you just got done saying the term is sensitive and shouldn't be used because it hurts people's feelings. "Reason and rationality ----> door ----> bye bye!".

Fucking stay consistent, or just stop.

Quote
... and uninterested in being a better person.

That's a real shame.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 14, 2015, 08:08:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

When person A asks person B to stop doing something and person B refuses, after being informed to stop, person B becomes responsible.
This is where I suppose your equation/percentage game comes in, as you bring up percentages again. But if 90% of the sex was consensual before it became nonconsensual, B isn't only responsible for 10% of the actual crime.
My friend, I believe we have take our respective metaphors completely in the wrong sense. My entire argument, that has remained the same since my first post, is, once again, while is is expected that a man will stop copulating when asked, there is a very real chance that this will not happen, and to that, it would be wise, and the good Dr Ruth suggests, to consider that the man won't stop, thus saving us all a lot of problems. The point here being that sure we get drunk and stoned some times and do stupid shit like invite some stranger to fuck us and then demand they stop and now somehow proclaim a crime has been committed because, " I was drunk and stupid and did something stupid, but the other drunk and stupid should have stopped when I asked him too, therefore lets throw him in jail for 10 years and ignore the drunk and stupid I did."

Quote
Also, to the other comment in which you say Drunkenshoe had sex with a woman and I haven't (because I'm counting myself as a regular poster in this thread). Really?
For the life of me I don't know why, aitm, but I thought you would be better than mudslinging.
See you are projecting, I did not suggest in any way this as an insult only that I am more familiar with Solitary and APA's history therefore was sure they had sex with a woman and I thought for sure a few years ago that shoe said we was bi- so I missed that. You took that as an insult towards you but it had nothing at all to do with you. Frankly for all the time you have been here I do not recall any of your posts talking about your personal life in regards to whether you were even hetero which until now, I really did not know.

As to my metaphors, they are really quite simple. Suggesting that because something is against the law is, as I sure fucking thought everyone here would recognize, is no guarantee that people will respect the law and not run you over, continue to fuck you or break any and every law simply because you don't think they should.

But really I want to get back to the percentages because I find your view rather interesting in that you seem to think that a person who initiates sex with a person has absolutely no guilt if the sex does not turn out satisfactorily. In this thread, satisfactory seems to be an immediate cessation to the act of sex which the first person initiated.  I cannot do that. I hold each person responsible for their own behavior, and I have pounded this into my daughter heads as well (to what avail yet, I do not know) That some people believe a person responsibility to initiating something that does not turn out to their liking is therefore not responsible for any part of the act is rather stunning.  You know in your first metaphor with the guy giving the other person a ride and having the other person take over….lets make it a little similar. The person stops the car, tells the other person how great the car is and invites the person to take it for a test ride and tells him to "put it through the mill". This is a little more similar to our scenario I think.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mr.Obvious on June 15, 2015, 01:48:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I cant speak for Belgium, but coming from the country that exports more "culture" than anyone else, and is talked about more than any other country in the world... yeah, the United States definitely has a rape culture and I can see how we would make it seem like it's a huge problem in the West. I don't know the numbers for Europe so I cant speak for how prevalent it is or isn't over there. I can only speak from my experiences and use examples from people here...

I will use a couple of quotes from this article...
...

Thanks Shiranu. I'll be looking into that. I found the original report over at http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/summary_reports.html (http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/summary_reports.html). It, being over 120 pages long, might take me some time to go through it. (We were taught never to just acccept statistics you see in articles, and if possible always go back to the original.) But I do plan on doing so. I'll give your reply a more propper reply then. Just a heads up because it may take a while.

Thanks again.
Title: Rape Culture
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 15, 2015, 06:19:57 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You first, kid. I mean, you are still posting in this thread, aren't you? I am as well but I am bored and uninterested in being a better person.

Simply put, noone is interested in you being uninterested or bored. Noone gives a fuck how unhappy and disappointed you are with your life is. We ALL are in some way or another. THat doesn't give anyone some special position on spewing bullshit down their high horse. You are posting in this thread, right? 

This is your fucking pride talking. Yes, that thing you come up with to slap every religious retard come to this site. Your pride. There is a serious world issue half of the world population HAS to deal with every day, everywhere and it is not going go away OR treated to be with less importance, just because you and majority of the het men in the world are too stupid to get it, uninterested or bored with it.

This is about supporting men's rights too, but as almost all men in this forum -save a few- not even in the first beginner phase to get what's going on, that's over your current civilisation level. We'll skip that.

Quote
I think my main beef is with the term "rape culture." It's kind of like calling a cell phone a "brain tumor generator." As if this topic isn't emotional enough, we need a term like that meant to provoke. Not enlighten. Not educate. Not illustrate. Just provoke an emotional reaction. Because that's what we need. It's fucking helpful.

Yeah, they sit down around and think of terms that will provoke emotional reactions about rape. Just like the religious people think what scientists do with evolution and global warming I suppose.

That is the probably the most stupid example I have heard about the subject. Trust me, republitards in your country have come up with better ones.

You don't know anything about rape culture, you don't want to know and you just talk out of your ass. Rape culture is not some fancy made up term, a bunch of angry 'feminazi' came up to express their 'hate' towrads men. The bullshit category it relies on DEFINED the relationships in your life too. It's in all of our lives.

Quote
I don't know why this ballooned up to nine worthless pages or why Dr Ruth's original comments seem to be so controversial.


Yeah, you don't. Because you are too fucking angry AND that makes you very fucking stupid. Angry generally with life. With people. 

Quote
"I am 100% against rape. I do say to women if they don't want to have sex with a man, they should not be naked in bed w/him.

That's^ another way of saying 'HETEROSEXUAL MEN HAVE A RESERVED 'NATURAL' RIGHT TO RAPE WOMEN UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, BECAUSE THEY ARE HET MEN AND THEY HAVE A COCK'.

Since when you are supporting polictically correct bullshit, anti? Saying there is a rape culture is 'emotional bullshit', but that^ statement is explanatory, is that it? Call a spade, a fucking spade.

I am prescribing a good, big 'go fuck yourself' to the doctor and anyone who support her. She is a senile dinosaur defending a rape culture BY VOICING THIS BULLSHIT with NO biological or physiological base behind it.

Quote
That's risky behavior like crossing street against the light. If a driver hits you, he's legally in the wrong but you're in the hospital."

I think the last sentence says it all. You can bang on for the rest of your life about rape culture if you want to, but you still have to live in the world that exists. Which means that if you do not want certain things to happen to you, you should modify your own behavior accordingly. If you don't want to get a sunburn, you don't sit out in the sun without wearing sunscreen. I don't see how this translates into blaming the victim unless someone is a complete narcissist. "But I don't want a sunburn." Then you should wear sunscreen and get some shade every once in a while. "But I shouldn't have to wear sunscreen. The sun shouldn't burn me." Rape shouldn't happen, but should's are a lousy form of protection. A guy should stop when a woman asks him to, but should's remain a lousy form of protection.

That and everyone is way to sensitive when it comes to sex. I mean, is rape the worst thing that can happen to a person? If so, then thank goodness my niece is dead from cancer so that will never happen to her. For fuck's sake.


Listen kiddo, rape is NOT an accident. How most men choose to act under some circumstances we have been talking about here is just a CHOICE THEY MAKE during a ONE on ONE action and relationship, right and there. Something they do because they see themselves entitled to do it, bercause of their gender, their sexual orientation. That is a result of rape culture ALONG with many other. 'Victim blaming' and 'victim shaming' for example are part of rape culture. They are as old as rape. Are you going to claim that they are invented to get emotional reactions, too?

Whenever a woman is raped the first thing people question is,

-what she was wearing
-at what time she was out
-she knew the man who raped her?
-did she date him before or was dating him when the rape occur
-was she drunk
-did she dance with her?

Any women who was raped under these circumstances is 'ASKING FOR IT'. Don't come to me with 'I personally don't think like that'. 

This only goes for women. ONLY. Because patriarchal culture recognises ONLY heterosexual male sexuality as the defining one and the rest is forced to accomodate and serve it. Every other sexuality is 'limited' and defined according to that. This is the idea that lies behind of usual, common het men behaviour. It's NOT A CAR ACCIDENT. It's a fucking choice. It's one gender exploiting, oppressing all the others.

-Homosexual men are 'unnatural perverts', because they are NOT heterosexual men.

-Lesbians are 'unnatural perverts' because they are seen as 'playing the het men's role' or having some sexual relationship without men, which is not defined as 'sex' in the common bigotry

-A transgender woman or man is at the bottom of the food chain, because one 'chooses' to be a 'woman' something 'less' than what he started with AND other is trying to be something 'more' than she is.

You understand ALL the bullshit that we struggle because of the religious, tribalist, backwards social norms and roles that are constantly forced on us AND you don't understand this?!

Do you know what does 'she is asking for it' mean or 'this is the reality, deal with it' mean? It means THAT under certain circumstances determined according to the male culture RAPE IS A REALITY APPROVED BY SOCIETY THAT WOMEN HAVE TO ACCEPT, because they are women.

Same with getting naked with a man in bed. If the woman stops giving her consent, doesn't like what is happening anymore, she is TO BLAME. That's a reality. And when people CALL THAT REALITY as if there is unstoppable natural phenomenon behind it, it becomes RAPE CULTURE. This is not an accident or a natural disaster.

Your niece's death, or an anology of a car accident HAS nothing to do with cultural, social norms that has been nailed in to our heads that we are suffering from.





Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 15, 2015, 06:39:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
My entire argument, that has remained the same since my first post, is, once again, while is is expected that a man will stop copulating when asked, there is a very real chance that this will not happen, and to that, it would be wise, and the good Dr Ruth suggests, to consider that the man won't stop, thus saving us all a lot of problems.

Why isn't the doctor saying out loud that 'MEN can stop and so should STOP' when they are told to stop in that position, but 'we should ALSO always be careful' ? Why is her 'warning' is based on heterosexual males being some sort of mindless animals with a 'natural' right to not to be denied their way at that moment?

Because we shouldn't 'berate' men. We 'shouldn't' bruise their egos or their manhood. If a woman stands out and expresses these facts loudly in media, she would be LYNCHED. Esp. if is she was a young woman. The rape threats would fly over her head. How does she dare to berate men?! Like What happened with Rebecca Watson or Anita Sarkeesian with sceptic, free thinking, atheist het men.

'Warning' people to consider to be careful while deciding to have sex with strangers IS COMPLETELY DIFFERTENT than telling them 'BEING NAKED WITH A MAN IS LIKE PLAYING IN TRAFFIC'.

She is not making a 'warning'. She wants women to accept that they should accept to be raped when they are in a certain position with a man. That's NOT a warning. That's telling women 'take that and deal with it'.

She gives a green card to men to go on as they like because that's fucking 'legitimate' when it is a man.



 


Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 15, 2015, 07:43:38 AM
So Shoe, what then is the punishment. On one hand, most of us, surely all of us, agree that battering a woman and fucking her against her will in a parking garage is rape. And for the sake of argument lets say this is an automatic 20 years. What is the punishment for a man whose 44th thrust during consensual sex is legal but the 45th is now rape?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 15, 2015, 10:05:28 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So Shoe, what then is the punishment. On one hand, most of us, surely all of us, agree that battering a woman and fucking her against her will in a parking garage is rape. And for the sake of argument lets say this is an automatic 20 years. What is the punishment for a man whose 44th thrust during consensual sex is legal but the 45th is now rape?

That is the problem. You think that rape has some rare special circumstance crime that occurs with 'extra violence' commited by some 'monster', one of those serial rapists, sexual psychopaths or sexual sadists we find often in tv series than real life. That's also one of the reasons men jump at most cases with 'false blame' and with 'aah there is no evidence of violence, see'.

How do you even ask a question like this to me? Have you ever been curious what I think about the punishment must be for murder? Or for petty theft? Or genocide? Don't play games. How can I know and what does it even matter if I give you a number?

You haven't once acknowledged the fact that there is a green card given to heterosexual male on 'how he can act' if he wants/chooses and that woman is supporting this with her so called 'warning' AND you are asking me what should be the punishment?

You don't even openly say -like most het males here- what you perfectly know about how 'male culture' rules on almost everything with women and their sexuality -not to mention other genders and other sexualities- hell, you have lived through 70s, 80s and so on which was far worse, while you keep indicate nothing will change on 'how men will act'. But you can't just say it out loud. Instead you keep banging, beating around the bush that 'what a man is likely to do' and how that is reality.

You keep talking as if there is NO connection with this and the whole male culture we live in. It's a fucking car crash to you. And as I am the master 'evil femicunt' hating all het men in the world, I probably thought a good vengeful punisment, didn't I?. Because if we can't slice something that can be measurable in our 'perfect' laws made by our 'nothing wrong' with patriarchal human culture, it doesn't exist. It's not an issue. Sorry, 'drunkenshoe program against all heterosexual men of the planet earth' doesn't have an answer. /Sarcasm. Heavy one.





 
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 15, 2015, 11:35:29 AM
I have several times agree that a person should stop when asked, you never read that part. I then say, just because you think they should stop doesn't mean they will. You take that as I hold men have the right to rape women, which again I have not stated nor to I share the sentiment.

However, if you want to call rape on the 49th stroke after 48 consensual ones good luck with that, because that will never happen. You can call that a "male culture" if you wish, but I call it common sense. We don't send people to jail when consensual sex is not good enough, not long enough, or does not stop at the exact precise time you hollar stop. You can come up with another name for it, but standing a real rape victim next to a gal whose only  objection to the act was the guy coming in her is a farce.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 15, 2015, 11:55:47 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have several times agree that a person should stop when asked, you never read that part.

I did. And you also said this is where you stand:

Quote
Yeah, sorry, I am one of those guys that if you say you got raped and you were naked in a bed shoving some guys dick into your snatch, I have a hard time standing on your side of the table.


Quote
I then say, just because you think they should stop doesn't mean they will. You take that as I hold men have the right to rape women, which again I have not stated nor to I share the sentiment.

Yeah, that is what I am talking about and keep telling you that people like Ruth, like you, majority of the world population, men and women; all the fucking patriarchal culture we live in is TELLING them that it is OK to NOT to STOP.

Quote
Snip.

Yeah, so for the same bullshit that goes down there. 'Real rape' victim. When is rape real to you? Would it be real if your daughter lived something through like that and tell you that she made it perfectly clear that she stopped enjoying it after the 48 stroke, but that the man said 'Good luck, that won't happen'? Does that put things a bit a more clear perspective for you or am I just being a 'nasty cunt' as usual? Are you going to tell her that her objection was just to the act guy coming in her is a farce? Because common sense says, 'she shouldn't demand a stop and lie there and take it, because she is a woman'?

Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 15, 2015, 01:56:33 PM
Firstly, the only person who consistently calls you names is you. I haven't.

If you asked my daughter how I feel about this she will tell you exactly what I have told you. I will tell my granddaughter the same thing.

The only protector of your body is you. Nobody else is looking out for your welfare.

Maybe it is my idea of personal responsibility that you seem to have an issue with. If I fuck a gal and don't use a condom or if she is not on the pill, I am 100% responsible if she gets pregnant or if I get STD's. I am the sole protector of my body. If a gal lets a guy fuck her without a condom or she is not on the pill, she is 100% responsible if she gets pregnant or if she gets an STD. She is the sole protector of her body.

I have been using this as my main defense for womens rights for 40 years. It's her body her fucking choice! She is the sole protector and warden of her body, men don't have a fucking say in the issue. Period.

And because of that, if you do stupid shit and stupid shit happens quit fucking blaming other people for your stupidity. Pull a knife out of the sheathing to see if its sharp? It's sharp you moron, why are you suing? Walk across the road without looking, get ready to get slamed, oh sure they are wrong but that's a fine blanket to lay on your casket you fucking idiot! Get out of the drivers seat of a motor home because the fucking button says "automatic control"? Of course you crashed you fucking moron. Climb into bed and start fucking some guy? Guess what? Good chance you're fucked.

Lastly your last sentence tells me that you are indeed, at least for that sentence, being stupid. Of course she can ask the guy to stop stupid, of course she should, I have said all along they have the right. Stop being so fucking stupid.  You would tell her "don't worry he will", and I am saying, "don't count on it. The only person looking out for your welfare is you."

Why must I be so rigid on that to my daughter and granddaughter? Because they are woman, and men are men and I know the difference.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 15, 2015, 02:30:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lastly your last sentence tells me that you are indeed, at least for that sentence, being stupid. Of course she can ask the guy to stop stupid, of course she should, I have said all along they have the right. Stop being so fucking stupid.  You would tell her "don't worry he will", and I am saying, "don't count on it. The only person looking out for your welfare is you."

For the 10th time, aitm. I have never said anything like this, I would never say anything as stupid as that to someone, neither I act that way myself. Stop putting words in my mouth!

Quote
The only protector of your body is you. Nobody else is looking out for your welfare.

No, this is something beyond that. You are talking like half secularised muslim clerics.

Quote
Maybe it is my idea of personal responsibility that you seem to have an issue with.

No, as I have said. NO. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Quote
If I fuck a gal and don't use a condom or if she is not on the pill, I am 100% responsible if she gets pregnant or if I get STD's. I am the sole protector of my body. If a gal lets a guy fuck her without a condom or she is not on the pill, she is 100% responsible if she gets pregnant or if she gets an STD. She is the sole protector of her body.

Irrelevant. We are talking about something else.

Quote
I have been using this as my main defense for womens rights for 40 years. It's her body her fucking choice! She is the sole protector and warden of her body, men don't have a fucking say in the issue. Period.

No, you cannot defend women's rights just by telling one gender, only women 'NOT TO BE STUPID by her choices'.  Because this is something beyond about being clever or protect your own body.

Men need to acknowledge the general male culture and how does that cause men act in certain ways, doesn't matter how smart your pick.

This CANNOT be a one sided thing. You have to mess up with the other side. You need to educate men while you are tell women being careful.

Otherwise, it is NOT different than just trying to cover women and limit their interaction with men as much as possible. Do you think what muslims do relies on something different than the idea of "how a man will act"? Theirs is just extreme. The idea is the exactly same. The application is different.

You have to mess up with male culture. Teach men that they are not entitled. You cannot even say that out loud in an internet forum. You don't accept it. And then tell me that how it is being stupid for women act in some way...blah blah. 

Quote
And because of that, if you do stupid shit and stupid shit happens quit fucking blaming other people for your stupidity. Pull a knife out of the sheathing to see if its sharp? It's sharp you moron, why are you suing? Walk across the road without looking, get ready to get slamed, oh sure they are wrong but that's a fine blanket to lay on your casket you fucking idiot! Get out of the drivers seat of a motor home because the fucking button says "automatic control"? Of course you crashed you fucking moron. Climb into bed and start fucking some guy? Guess what? Good chance you're fucked.

This is NOT an accident. Same thing will happen doesn't matter how smart you fuck. You are the one who is blaming women for something that can happen, JUST because men think it's their entitlement. You only want to berate women, you need to do that to men too. You KNOW this, you perfectly understand what am I talking about you fucking hypocritical bullkheaded asshole.











Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 15, 2015, 09:11:02 PM
(snip)- reconsidered….simply not worth the effort…..













[/quote]
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 16, 2015, 04:12:05 AM
Ah...that's rich.

Show that effort to understand that you are holding one gender, one side responsible for some thing that goes wrong because other side think it's his right. From victim blaming to covering up women and you thinking that this is about women's choice relies on the same idea. Part of the same pattern.







Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 16, 2015, 06:24:03 PM
Upon reflection I'm retracting what I said in this post (http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=7882.msg1078406#msg1078406). Now, to the stuff I want to address...

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The only protector of your body is you. Nobody else is looking out for your welfare.
Yup, it's a dog-eat-dog world. Better not get stolen from, beaten, raped, or murdered, because no one is gonna step in and save you from that shit.

If that wasn't your point, you should consider rephrasing it, because that's what I took away from your statement.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Maybe it is my idea of personal responsibility that you seem to have an issue with. If I fuck a gal and don't use a condom or if she is not on the pill, I am 100% responsible if she gets pregnant or if I get STD's. I am the sole protector of my body. If a gal lets a guy fuck her without a condom or she is not on the pill, she is 100% responsible if she gets pregnant or if she gets an STD. She is the sole protector of her body.
No. If there is no mutual consent to go raw, contraception is the default assumption. If you withhold vital information such as what STDs you have, that's not only a form of rape, it's criminal transmission (http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/transmitting-std-criminal-laws-penalties.htm) and you can be listed as a registered sex offender in addition to fines and jail time. You cannot impose conditions on another person's body without their consent. This is why doctors have you sign waivers before they treat you, and it's why both partners must agree to have baby-making sex. Yes, you should be mindful of your own body and take steps to avoid these situations, but when push comes to shove it is not your responsibility to prevent someone from sexually assaulting you: the culprit in question shouldn't be doing it in the first place!

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have been using this as my main defense for womens rights for 40 years.
If this is a defense of women's rights, I hope you are never allowed to touch another woman in your life. Apparently, you think that if you force yourself upon a woman, its her fault for not pushing you off. Hey buddy, Islam's calling, they want their misogyny playbook back.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And because of that, if you do stupid shit and stupid shit happens quit fucking blaming other people for your stupidity. Pull a knife out of the sheathing to see if its sharp? It's sharp you moron, why are you suing? Walk across the road without looking, get ready to get slamed, oh sure they are wrong but that's a fine blanket to lay on your casket you fucking idiot! Get out of the drivers seat of a motor home because the fucking button says "automatic control"? Of course you crashed you fucking moron. Climb into bed and start fucking some guy? Guess what? Good chance you're fucked.
"Guy chooses not to pull out or wear a condom? Tough shit, bitch, now raise my baby."

Do you read your own writing before you post? I thought I was reading something by a hardcore Saudi Muslim, not an educated atheist who should know better.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 16, 2015, 07:14:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
stuff he said
yeah, I get it, don't worry, everybody else will take care of you. Nobody ever disobeys the law. Everybody tells the truth. Nobody ever lies. It takes a village..rah rah..sis boom bah!!

Well good for you. No thanks, I want my kids to be aware that the world does not look out for them, that it is up to them to protect themselves. You can teach your kids that guys always tell the truth, they will stop when you ask them to, they will wear protection because after all, yer just a stupid fucking girl, let the man take care of everything.

No thanks.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 16, 2015, 07:49:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
yeah, I get it, don't worry, everybody else will take care of you. Nobody ever disobeys the law. Everybody tells the truth. Nobody ever lies. It takes a village..rah rah..sis boom bah!!

Well good for you. No thanks, I want my kids to be aware that the world does not look out for them, that it is up to them to protect themselves. You can teach your kids that guys always tell the truth, they will stop when you ask them to, they will wear protection because after all, yer just a stupid fucking girl, let the man take care of everything.

No thanks.
*ahem*

"Yes, you should be mindful of your own body and take steps to avoid these situations, but when push comes to shove it is not your responsibility to prevent someone from sexually assaulting you."

So you don't read the shit you write, you don't read the shit other people write... aitm, do you, in fact, know how to read? Honest question.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 16, 2015, 08:35:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
but when push comes to shove it is not your responsibility to prevent someone from sexually assaulting you."[/i]

It's your responsibility to use reasonable  common sense! Are you kidding me?

This conversation has been pretty much about two people already having sex and one person objecting at "some" time and then proclaiming it is rape.  That has been the conversation. This is not about some guy walking up to you and batting you upside the head and raping you. This is about someone you willingly invited in to have sex, engaged in it, pretty much passed the whole intent of assault so far.. oh hell, this is already the seventh time I have said the same thing

You want the court to send him to prison for 20 years?  Not going to happen. And most people apparently agree.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 16, 2015, 08:42:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You want the court to send him to prison for 20 years?  Not going to happen. And most people apparently agree.
I absolutely agree, but that's not what you said. You said it's a woman's fault if she gets rape. That's what "The only protector of your body is you. Nobody else is looking out for your welfare." means.

Quote
This is about someone you willingly invited in to have sex, engaged in it,
And then if you need to stop for some reason it's perfectly fine for the other person to just keep going, according to you, reasons be damned. Assuming we're still talking only about women, what if she's hurt, hmm? What if something going on during sex is physically painful and she really needs her partner to stop? What if something urgent happens, like the phone starts ringing and the caller ID says its a relative who rarely calls you unless it's an emergency?

There are a whole host of reasons why a woman might need to withdraw consent in the middle of sex, and regardless of what you might think about some of those reasons, the same rules must apply in every situation. When consent has been withdrawn, continuing is a crime. Period, end of story.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 16, 2015, 09:07:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I absolutely agree, but that's not what you said. You said it's a woman's fault if she gets rape.
Bullshit! Show me one time where I actually exactly said that! Exactly that! Not what you "think" you think I meant.

Quote
That's what "The only protector of your body is you. Nobody else is looking out for your welfare." means.
Bullshit! It means you are the only protector of your body. Nobody else is looking out for your welfare. You're accusing me of not reading?


Quote
And then if you need to stop for some reason it's perfectly fine for the other person to just keep going, according to you, reasons be damned.
Bullshit! Post the sentence where I said exactly that! Exactly that! Not what you "think" you think I meant.


Quote
When consent has been withdrawn, continuing is a crime.
show me an exact sentence where I said it was not a crime. I said I can't call it rape!


Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 16, 2015, 09:19:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bullshit! Show me one time where I actually exactly said that! Exactly that! Not what you "think" you think I meant.
That was the take-away. If that was not the intended take-away, rephrase your sentence.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bullshit! It means you are the only protector of your body. Nobody else is looking out for your welfare. You're accusing me of not reading?
This is pretty much the same logic used by Shariah Law apologists. Again, if this was not the intended take-away, rephrase your sentence. I'm giving you a very clear way to make me understand your intent here. If you refuse to help me understand, I can only conclude that you do, in fact, fully support the right of a man to fuck women without their consent.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bullshit! Post the sentence where I said exactly that! Exactly that! Not what you "think" you think I meant.
"You are the only protector of your body." So if a man rapes a woman, the woman is at fault for not protecting herself. Victim blaming, in other words. Just because you used different language doesn't change the meaning.

"But I didn't post the exact words!" Yeah, and I didn't explicitly say that you support rape, but you're accusing me of saying that anyway. Hmm...

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
show me an exact sentence where I said it was not a crime. I said I can't call it rape!
Rape: unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim.

I think you can call it rape. And rape, my friend, is a very serious crime. And denying that a rape is, in fact, a rape, is generally frowned upon in most societies.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 16, 2015, 09:34:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Rape: unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim.

"without consent of the victim"…..once the dick is in by consent, calling it non-consensual seems a tad ridiculous. After five minutes of consensual, calling it non-consensual is getting more difficult….going from that to rape in a couple seconds is a bit harder to do.

As to how you comprehend other peoples writings, I can't help you with that. I believe I have been extremely clear and obvious in every possible way. I don't see a need to review how I write when I have had no problems in the past with expressing my opinions. But I shall attempt to make them easier for others to understand once I understand the audience.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 16, 2015, 09:41:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"without consent of the victim"…..once the dick is in by consent, calling it non-consensual seems a tad ridiculous. After five minutes of consensual, calling it non-consensual is getting more difficult….going from that to rape in a couple seconds is a bit harder to do.
"Uh, dude, get off. No, seriously, I'm bleeding, get off." *continues anyway*

TOTALLY NOT RAPE THOUGH ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!11!1!!1!BBQ!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!121!!!!

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As to how you comprehend other peoples writings, I can't help you with that. I believe I have been extremely clear and obvious in every possible way. I don't see a need to review how I write when I have had no problems in the past with expressing my opinions. But I shall attempt to make them easier for others to understand once I understand the audience.
"I'm not bad at writing, everyone else is just stupid!"

(http://spiritualhealingsource.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Dunce-cap-in-corner.jpg)
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: aitm on June 17, 2015, 09:09:23 AM
Quote
"I'm not bad at writing, everyone else is just stupid!"

Seems to be the case here.

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 17, 2015, 09:26:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Seems to be the case here.

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.
Ha!  That picture reminds me of my home.  We have a 80 lb sheppard and a 12 lb chi/mix.  The Chi is the alpha and humps the sheppard all the time.  And takes toys from him all the time, too.  But they really do get along well.  Quite a sight, tho.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: TomFoolery on June 17, 2015, 10:13:11 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"without consent of the victim"…..once the dick is in by consent, calling it non-consensual seems a tad ridiculous. After five minutes of consensual, calling it non-consensual is getting more difficult….

Only in the mind of a rapist.

If I go get a tattoo and change my mind partway through for any reason (maybe the artist isn't doing as good a job as I thought or maybe I just decided my friends were right and I don't want the entire cast of Looney Tunes printed on my chest) should the tattoo artist get to hold me down and say "Quit being a little bitch. I cleared the whole day for this so I'm going to finish."?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Aletheia on June 17, 2015, 08:17:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
…..once the dick is in by consent, calling it non-consensual seems a tad ridiculous. After five minutes of consensual, calling it non-consensual is getting more difficult….going from that to rape in a couple seconds is a bit harder to do.

Consent in reference to sex means that both parties involved have to agree. The moment one party (regardless of reason) no longer agrees to have sex, then sex has become non-consensual - therefore a misunderstanding at best and rape at worst.

To put things more succinctly, during sex the woman is allowing the man to put the dick in for as long as she is willing to allow it. The same is true to say that a woman is allowed engulf a man's dick so long as he is willing allow it. Under no circumstances has ownership of the genitals been exchanged or a specific duration of time has been rented. The entire agreement is subject to "at-will" terms. 
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 17, 2015, 09:40:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ha!  That picture reminds me of my home.  We have a 80 lb sheppard and a 12 lb chi/mix.  The Chi is the alpha and humps the sheppard all the time.  And takes toys from him all the time, too.  But they really do get along well.  Quite a sight, tho.
That's funny because I have a little male Chihuahua, that keeps humping one that is big male, being half Chihuahua and Italian Greyhound, and they too get along well too.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Mike Cl on June 17, 2015, 09:47:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That's funny because I have a little male Chihuahua, that keeps humping one that is big male, being half Chihuahua and Italian Greyhound, and they too get along well too.
Half Chi and half greyhound?  I have never seen one of those.  I bet that is a good looking dog!  My two are fixed males, too.  And both are rescue dogs, so we are not sure what the mixes really are--we think the big one is sheppard/border collie--he is mainly black with the sheppard rust showing through in places and his face is very wolf like--beautiful dog.  And the chi is a terrier mix of some sort--very smart and full of character--he likes to 'talk'.  Gotta say--love my furry children.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Solitary on June 17, 2015, 09:51:07 PM
So the real question is what constitutes rape in the eyes of Law who his blind. We all agree, I thought, that it is wrong to keep having sex with a woman if she says stop, but is it really rape if he doesn't right in the middle of it? Why is this debate so emotionally charged? There are a lot of reasons why women say no, and some are just because they want to punish men for whatever reason too. Why is this being ignored and assuming it is only men that are being jerks every time? There are some really nasty women out there too, not just men.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Shiranu on June 17, 2015, 10:11:16 PM
Quote
...but is it really rape if he doesn't right in the middle of it?

Yes. Sex without consent is rape.

Quote
Why is this debate so emotionally charged?

Why is rape emotionally charged... let me think about that one for a second and get back to you.

Quote
There are a lot of reasons why women say no, and some are just because they want to punish men for whatever reason too. Why is this being ignored...

Because just because a woman hurt your feelings doesn't mean you can rape her. If anything it shouldn't be ignored simply because that is fucking terrifying that anyone would think that a woman "punishing a man" therefor means rape is justified.

Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on June 17, 2015, 10:45:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There are a lot of reasons why women say no, and some are just because they want to punish men for whatever reason too.
I don't think anyone here is claiming that a man can magically teleport his dick out of the woman's vagina the exact instant she says to stop. Obviously he needs a couple seconds to process what's going on and extract himself. No one in their right mind would ever dispute that, and any woman who tries to call those couple seconds "rape" is clearly making a false accusation.
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: drunkenshoe on June 18, 2015, 04:36:51 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There are a lot of reasons why women say no, and some are just because they want to punish men for whatever reason too.

How does this even come up with rape issue? Doesn't matter WHY women -or men- say NO or draw their once given consent during sex. CONSENT is NOT ABOUT WHY. There is NO such thing as 'Oh your reasons are not valid for me, so I don't need to stop and that's not rape. Doesn't matter why.

Bringing up some imaginary circumstance while discussing consent during sex is just making excuses for rape, doesn't matter if you are aware of it or not. It's like saying 'but what if she was drunk', or 'but what if she was wearing a super mini skirt and very deep cleavage', 'what if she was a 'cock teaser' '. These are all the same things. It's about blaming the female in one way or another.



 







Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Johan on June 18, 2015, 06:16:07 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
We all agree, I thought, that it is wrong to keep having sex with a woman if she says stop, but is it really rape if he doesn't right in the middle of it?
Yes.

Quote
There are a lot of reasons why women say no, and some are just because they want to punish men for whatever reason too.
And how exactly would that make it not rape?
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Munch on October 02, 2015, 05:47:44 AM
When i read the title I thought about this.

(http://i.imgur.com/RdYKHzt.gif)
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Baruch on October 02, 2015, 06:54:55 AM
Failed post ;-(  OK, its working now ... sorry I asked ;-)
Title: Re: Dr. Ruth: being naked with a man is like playing in traffic.
Post by: Youssuf Ramadan on October 02, 2015, 07:07:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have to side with the females in this one.  If either partner wants to stop, even in the middle, they should be allowed to do so.  Even if they are married. 

Yup. Let's face it.... how often does this happen?  Very rarely.  I'm sure we can stop on the rare occasion it may be required, even if we decamp to the bathroom and finish the job ourselves.  It's the 21st century.

No reason a guy shouldn't play the same game if he thinks he's been trolled.  Go down with the tongue tornado in full deployment, get her warmed up and then say, "Nah, I've changed my mind" and get back on the Xbox.   :72:

 :wink2: