[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42462041]okay well that judge is wrong. man the ways you're trying to justify fucking drunk chicks is pretty disgusting. how about just don't fuck drunk chicks? how about that?
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
you keep putting the onus on the raped rather than the rapist, and hey maybe sometimes it IS hard to tell, i agree i've been around chicks that are really drunk and get all over you once they are, so here's what you do: you control yourself and you don't fuck them. better safe than sorry.[/QUOTE]
How about chicks don't consent then?
If you're drunk and you flip your car and kill 63 people and regret it: your fault
If you're drunk and you dance on a table and snap your leg in 3 places and regret it: your fault
If you're drunk and you unnecessarily spend tons of money and regret it: your fault
If you're drunk and you consent to sex and regret it: everyone elses fault
now which of those involve you doing something to others, and which of those involve someone doing something to YOU?
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42462150]now which of those involve you doing something to others, and which of those involve someone doing something to YOU?[/QUOTE]
So if people can cause irreparable harm to themselves while intoxicated, we should only consider situations in which others could do something bad? Because being drunk in the first place isn't at all bad.
If you're willingly intoxicated and consenting then you have a say in your own situation.
well i disagree. i think if someone is in a inebriated state of mind (even if they willingly put themselves in it) then you shouldn't be allowed to take advantage of them
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
and if you do i think you're at best a creepy piece of shit, at worst a rapist piece of shit
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42462205]well i disagree. i think if someone is in a inebriated state of mind (even if they willingly put themselves in it) then you shouldn't be allowed to take advantage of them
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
and if you do i think you're at best a creepy piece of shit, at worst a rapist piece of shit[/QUOTE]
Firstly, I don't think there is any need to resort to offensive language like that.
I also don't understand how you aim to absolve all people who consume alcohol of responsibility; if you absolve those consenting of responsibility then you should also be absolving those who would "do harm".
Its a two way street.
well i do, because some people seem to think that those things don't make you awful human garbage, when they do. now then, it's because you can't be responsible for being raped as it's something that's done to you, you can't be responsible for being taken advantage of as it's something that's done to you. understand? it's not a two way street, it's one way, DON'T RAPE. IF SHE'S DRUNK FUCK OFF.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42462243]well i do, because some people seem to think that those things don't make you awful human garbage, when they do. now then, it's because you can't be responsible for being raped as it's something that's done to you, you can't be responsible for being taken advantage of as it's something that's done to you. understand? it's not a two way street, it's one way, DON'T RAPE. IF SHE'S DRUNK FUCK OFF.[/QUOTE]
Its a two way street.
What you're asking for is to absolve people of responsibility who have consumed alcohol, which is absolutely preposterous.
The way you phrased it made it sound like doing self harm isn't as bad as harming others--yet in your mind consenting to sex is self harm.
Two way street.
what are you on about? i'm not taking about the person who's drunk, i'm talking about the person who's taking advantage of them. like i said before, you put all the onus on the raped and none of the rapist. what i'm asking is that you don't have sex with people who are mentally impaired.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42462330]what are you on about? i'm not taking about the person who's drunk, i'm talking about the person who's taking advantage of them. like i said before, you put all the onus on the raped and none of the rapist. what i'm asking is that you don't have sex with people who are mentally impaired.[/QUOTE]
Because rape means forceful penetration--if someone consents to sex while intoxicated that is their own doing. That automatically makes it not about rape in the first place.
You are pretty much calling people who consent rape victims.
If someone says no, is passed out, or so intoxicated that they cannot move or stand straight at all then that is another story.
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jackald;42462344]Taking precautions appropriate to the risk is just part of being a sensible human being. If you need to go into town via bus next week, and you read that there might be snow, then you should take precautions in case that there is snow (set your alarm an hour earlier, check the weather reports)
ultimately it's not your fault that there is snow, but you can take precautions to minimize the chance of it affecting you.
Frankly I think your first point is a bit silly. "Precautions won't do anything because ultimately whether or not the rape happens is up to the rapist". Well that's not true. If you're going out to a nightclub, maybe check out if it's a safe place before hand. Go with a friend, have a designated driver who can watch out for everyone, make sure someone's got your back in case your drink get spiked, don't put your drink down anywhere and keep the drink on you, hold a phone when sitting at the bar on your own to make it look like you're expecting a call at any moment.
Yes, ultimately that does not eliminate the chance, and sure it's ultimately the Rapist's "fault", but we're not talking about "IT'S YOUR FAULT, IT'S HIS FAULT, THEY ARE TO BLAME" we're talking about risk minimzation.
You want to minimize the risk of something happening. If you want to eliminate the risk, not going out will almost 100% reduce the risk, but then you won't get to go out. Not drinking lots will make you more alert to someone doing something untoward. These are factors that reduce the risk, not factors that make you responsible.[/QUOTE]
But no one on here would ever agree to those things because that would mean making people who willingly impair their senses by drinking alcohol responsible at any level.
do you not consider statutory rape a thing then?
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jackald;42462344]What if the two are both equally drunk and have sex because they both think that the other person wants to have sex with them.?
Would you agree that equal blame is on both participants if one of them says afterwards that they did not want to have sex?
What if the other person then says that they also did not want to have sex? I'm not trying to be awkward, i'm just genuinely curious what other people's opinions on this are.[/QUOTE]
well when it comes to both parties being drunk then both were impaired and it couldn't really be said that one was capable of taking advantage of the other
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42462421]do you not consider statutory rape a thing then?[/QUOTE]
That obviously depends how intoxicated the person is. I clearly said that if someone is passed out, or incapable of moving/walking (which would mean heavily intoxicated) then that isn't ok.
We're talking about people who are intoxicated to a certain extent but still able to consent. (and keep in mind intoxicated means anything above 0.01 BAC)
statutory rape is when someone has sex with someone below the age of consent. that is because although a minor can agree to sex, they can't consent because they are not fully aware of what they're consenting to/can be taken advantage of. i feel this should apply to drunk people too. obviously not people who are just tipsy, but people who are drunk enough to consent to something they would not consent to if they were sober.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42462459]That obviously depends how intoxicated the person is. I clearly said that if someone is passed out, or incapable of moving/walking (which would mean heavily intoxicated) then that isn't ok.
We're talking about people who are intoxicated to a certain extent but still able to consent. (and keep in mind intoxicated means anything above 0.01 BAC)[/QUOTE]
Statutory rape refers to having sex with a minor...
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42462496]statutory rape is when someone has sex with someone below the age of consent. that is because although a minor can agree to sex, they can't consent because they are not fully aware of what they're consenting to/can be taken advantage of. i feel this should apply to drunk people too. obviously not people who are just tipsy, but people who are drunk enough to consent to something they would not consent to if they were sober.[/QUOTE]
Then you're basically aiming to absolve people of any responsibility of drinking alcohol in the first place, in which case why not just ban alcohol.
If some person gets raped and they said no and were resisting the entire time, or so drunk they were unconscious or unable to move then that sounds like it would be called rape.
If someone goes out, has a couple of drinks, and meets some guy/girl and consents to sex and then regrets it the next day I have a very hard time even putting that in the same category as rape.
yeah i guess that's what i'm aiming for
[QUOTE=Valnar;42462499]Statutory rape refers to having sex with a minor...[/QUOTE]
From what I understand it is inclusive of people who are (by law) incapable of consenting to sex. Which could include people who are of legal age.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];42461575']Funny, the exact ways we deal with theft are active opposition like what I've been describing. If you want to deal with crime, increasing enforcement and being defensive in your actions does nothing and often only continues to increase the problem because it creates a state of "acceptance" and "normalization" of crime, and an enforced dynamic of predator-victim. Yet when we take this same approach with rape, suddenly it's bullshit.
I think it's clear your understandings of sociology and crime amount to watching COPS. Want to eliminate crime? Change SES. Want to eliminate rape? Change SES.
Is that to say that it's wise to not lock your doors? No, of course not, but we shouldn't enforce the position that it's normal, natural, or the best method to deal with crime to be defensive. Again, like I said in my very first comment in this thread: there' nothing wrong with being defensive, but it's counter-productive[B] to accept this is the method in dealing with the problem.[/B] Mostly because it doesn't actually deal with the problem.[/QUOTE]
I've said in this thread that it's not supposed to be the fix for the problem in like half of my posts.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];42461575']Actually I said that I'd rather not do it because I'd rather not have an unhealthy society. I was pointing out that our society is not healthy in this dynamic and that I'd rather be able to run around and do what I wish and not have to worry about being assaulted or raped for it. Doesn't mean I'm going to. Just that I should and that the mindset that this is harmful behavior or dangerous behavior contributes to the mindset of victim blaming that this is only a few steps from.[/QUOTE]
So you were talking about how things should be ideally? That's what the "you can't have both" meant? Because all I've been saying is that minding your safety is a smart thing to do, for now, until we fix the real problem. I never said to just accept it.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;42462544]I've said in this thread that it's not supposed to be the fix for the problem in like half of my posts.
So you were talking about how things should be ideally? That's what the "you can't have both" meant? Because all I've been saying is that minding your safety is a smart thing to do, for now, until we fix the real problem. I never said to just accept it.[/QUOTE]
It's not an ideal, it's a "it should and can be". If my understanding of the video is correct the guy was saying that "teach them not to rape" is not a valid alternative to "take precautions not to get raped". There's nothing wrong with being precautious, but on the other hand empowering people to defy the problem is better than telling them to passively defend against it.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42462540]From what I understand it is inclusive of people who are (by law) incapable of consenting to sex. Which could include people who are of legal age.[/QUOTE]
Uhh no, statutory rape means sex with a minor in pretty much all courts.
[QUOTE=Jackald;42462344] Well that's not true. If you're going out to a nightclub, maybe check out if it's a safe place before hand.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah I'll just be sure to check out nightclubrapists.com, the premier #1 directory listing of nightclubs in your area where you're most likely to be raped.
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42462513]
If someone goes out, has a couple of drinks, and meets some guy/girl and consents to sex and then regrets it the next day I have a very hard time even putting that in the same category as rape.[/QUOTE]
You seem to be misinformed that girls do this frequently and that it's a big problem.
Girls who have actually been raped have been screwed over plenty of times by policemen, judges, etc. who share this opinion that women are prone to lying about rape.
I have a hard time understanding why you would respond to this:
[QUOTE]If someone goes out, has a couple of drinks, and meets some guy/girl and consents to sex and then regrets it the next day I have a very hard time even putting that in the same category as rape[/QUOTE]
with this:
[QUOTE=BLOODGA$M;42463170]You seem to be misinformed that girls do this frequently and that it's a big problem.
Girls who have actually been raped have been screwed over plenty of times by policemen, judges, etc. who share this opinion that women are prone to lying about rape.[/QUOTE]
I've very clearly been addressing people who consent to sex and later on regret it as well as the people who insist any woman who is drunk at all and has sex with consent is being raped.
saying clothing does nothing on the topic, is like saying you can take a walk in the night waving your wallet up the air, getting robbed and then saying you didnt add any to the equation.
Nobody blames the victim, christ, its obviously the rapist fault, but we live in crime and thats a fact. You get out of your home knowing you can be robbed, raped, ran over and a,b,c combined. Though luck if someone saw you as a possible victim of anything, thats not up to you, but you can indeed present yourself as a better possible victim.
Thinking about we as victims dont add to the problem is thinking we live in a world without this things, without evil or without threats.
i have been robbed like three times to this date, which in some way, is like getting raped. (in a very superficial sort of way, dont kill me)
so its not a random neckbeard rant to get people angry ok?
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463248]I have a hard time understanding why you would respond to this:
with this:
I've very clearly been addressing people who consent to sex and later on regret it as well as the people who insist any woman who is drunk at all and has sex with consent is being raped.[/QUOTE]
Because you're overblowing problems that rarely ever happen and presenting things in a way as if it's somehow not always the rapists fault.
Why do we need to be told by you what is and isn't rape? Why do you feel like rape needs some sort of change in definition to allow certain things because of a few hypothetical cases you can come up with?
I mean everything you've been saying thus far sounds like some twisted justification along the lines of "Why shouldn't I be allowed to get some bitch drunk and sweet-talk her into my bed? It's her fault for being drunk, she should have known someone could take advantage of her that way!"
[QUOTE=autodesknoob;42463284]saying clothing does nothing on the topic, is like saying you can take a walk in the night waving your wallet up the air, getting robbed and then saying you didnt add any to the equation.
Nobody blames the victim, christ, its obviously the rapist fault, but we live in crime and thats a fact. You get out of your home knowing you can be robbed, raped, ran over and a,b,c combined. Though luck if someone saw you as a possible victim of anything, thats not up to you, but you can indeed present yourself as a better possible victim.
Thinking about we as victims dont add to the problem is thinking we live in a world without this things, without evil or without threats.
i have been robbed like three times to this date, which in some way, is like getting raped. (in a very superficial sort of way, dont kill me)
so its not a random neckbeard rant to get people angry ok?[/QUOTE]
rape is not like robbery in anyway whatsoever. the causes are COMPLETELY different
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=BLOODGA$M;42463297]Because you're overblowing problems that rarely ever happen and presenting things in a way as if it's somehow not always the rapists fault.
Why do we need to be told by you what is and isn't rape? Why do you feel like rape needs some sort of change in definition to allow certain things because of a few hypothetical cases you can come up with?[/QUOTE]
nigerianprince is a perfect example of what the 'teach them not to rape' rhetoric is all about.
[QUOTE=BLOODGA$M;42463297]Because you're overblowing problems that rarely ever happen and presenting things in a way as if it's somehow not always the rapists fault.
Why do we need to be told by you what is and isn't rape? Why do you feel like rape needs some sort of change in definition to allow certain things because of a few hypothetical cases you can come up with?[/QUOTE]
Probably because I can see that alcohol is at the root of most of these 'hypothetical' situations. Again, these are people willingly impairing their decision making process.
Also I've clearly said in the situations that I brought up that there was either consent or implied consent, the only "problem" is alcohol.
And to make matters even worse is that alcohol isn't the only thing on earth that impairs people. They could be taking prescription drugs which do the same or worse or they could have a mental condition.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42463307]rape is not like robbery in anyway whatsoever. the causes are COMPLETELY different[/QUOTE]
so what? its a threat and a submission against your will.
I know that we must learn as a society to eradicate these behaviors, but lets not forget they are still out there.
and by saying it like that you miss my analogy.
[QUOTE=autodesknoob;42463326]so what? its a threat and a submission against your will.
I know that we must learn as a society to eradicate these behaviors, but lets not forget they are still out there.
and by saying it like that you miss my analogy.[/QUOTE]
your analogy doesn't apply to this situation AT ALL. robbery is about trying to gain money or items that are worth something. anyone can be reduced to robbery if they're put in dire enough straits. rape is NOT about sex or fulfilling sexual desires, someones clothing has nothing to do with it. noone is going to start raping people because they haven't had sex in a long time
[QUOTE=autodesknoob;42463326]so what? its a threat and a submission against your will.
I know that we must learn as a society to eradicate these behaviors, but lets not forget they are still out there.
and by saying it like that you miss my analogy.[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand how people continually believe that the earth will ever be without bad things.
In this fantasy land where rape, robbery, crime and discrimination don't exist the only thing that would be stopping them is the legal system and society.
When there is a major war, natural disaster or major resource shortages things would obviously go somewhat back to nature.
Who do you think would be the most vulnerable members of the human race in such an instance?
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463347]I still don't understand how people continually believe that the earth will ever be without bad things.
In this fantasy land where rape, robbery, crime and discrimination don't exist the only thing that would be stopping them is the legal system and society.
When there is a major war, natural disaster or major resource shortages things would obviously go somewhat back to nature.
Who do you think would be the most vulnerable members of the human race in such an instance?[/QUOTE]
i still don't understand how people continually believe people actually believe the world will ever be without bad things
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463320]Probably because I can see that alcohol is at the root of most of these 'hypothetical' situations. Again, these are people willingly impairing their decision making process.
[/QUOTE]
So basically, you're admitting here that the definition of rape needs to be changed to grant exceptions to people who are, in your opinion, "too drunk".
This idea you have that people have a tendency to "get drunk, have sex, and regret it" isn't backed by facts or statistics and it's not a special excuse for rape. Girls don't just go out and get drunk so they can have men arrested after having sex with them. On the extremely rare occasion that something like that does happen it's almost always motivated by revenge over something, it's not fuelled by this inane notion of "crazy girls who cry rape".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
