Discussion in 'Politics' started by ElectricFetus, Jul 13, 2017.
hell hath no fury........................
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Are you saying every man just wants it? What would people think if he had said no? What would she says if he refused her mid-coitus? Women have literally screamed rape to get out of a paying a taxi, you think a women would not scream rape unless he went along with everything she did?
Yes, paying a taxi:
So if a women was willing, she not much of a victim either?
Woo wait a minute, she is fucking him right? Why are you not asking your "what kind of person would have sex with a total stranger", on her? There are women that get gang banged and love it, that is their business and I'm not moralizing about it, but you have a problem with men that fuck stranger women but not women that fuck stranger men?
Wow, so you don't believe in equality then?
Oh look at this, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39568635 , what is this? women are people and not angelic beings devoid of evil or agency as you suggests, who would have thunk it?
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Click because some girls really are full-time horny, too!
Would you please spare us the fucking moronic fallacies, and #StartMakingSense?
Because, really, now is the time to go making up straw men?
Question: Just how stupid would you like us to believe you are?
I mean, seriously, can we at least just clear that up, now? Do you understand that it is actually impolite for people to presume another to be so stupid as you pretend to be?
And, for the record, look, dude, whatever, but the last time a chick had her ass in my face at a strange time it came about for lack of vigilance because that kind of thing doesn't matter to us; that happens sometimes when people who aren't intimate partners don't spend their time objectifying one another as sex toys, by which let me be clear that I mean it's a lot easier to get along with women now that I've given up the pretense of hitting on them. And, you know, it turns out that a lot of the time, when a woman says she's not interested in or thinking about sex, it's true she isn't, and wouldn't be except someone decided to ask her about it. To the other, some girls are full-time horny, too. But while she might know what she's doing, or might not even be thinking about that sort of thing, quite clearly you are.
Oh, and one more thing: When you whine wondering how sex crime promotes inequality, don't go bawling, "What does this have to do with the topic?" when a woman is telling us just that.
It would probably do better to just wander around with a t-shirt reading, "Fuck off! Don't talk to me!"
Or, you know, maybe you could actually fail to go out of your way to fuck it all up? You know, maybe every once in a while? Or, you know, just once? Maybe? Show people it's possible?
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Ok then, you explain to me what birch's statement means? What is the conclusion?
So are your saying I'm objectifying women by noticing when I'm being hit on or flirted with? Notice that is a question, you can either answer it or scream at me that I'm being stupid and eject, either way, I don't care. As for giving up the pretense of hitting on women, dude, I have not had sex in 4 years and I don't plan on ever again, I DON'T HIT ON WOMEN. I have no interest in women beyond friends, and you of all people I should not need to explain my sexual preferences to.
That does not answer the question.
I love Hawaiian button up shirts by the way.
I honestly have no clue what your jabbering about, please rephrase.
Why don't you explain how you drew this conclusion:
Or anything else that birch said, for that matter.
what conclusion am I suppose to draw? Lets look at the premises
"unfortunately, it's often men who rape other men, even heterosexual men rape other males as a form of domination or humiliation. fortunately for men, it's very hard for a female to rape a male due to anatomy and also disparate in physical strength."
and what is the conclusion? The best I can draw is: "please, spare me the male victimhood of sexual abuse unless it occurred in childhood and when they were weak and vulnerable and under threat of another"
Am I misinterpreting something? please explain.
(insert title here)
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Click to metachange the metasubject but not metareally. (It's complicated.)
Yeah. Yeah, we know.
The problem with filling you in on the detail is that nobody has any reason to expect that to be anything other than a waste of time; it's kind of like when someone generally says something↗ akin to, "But I never said such a thing, that [is] your straw-man to begin with", and everyone else is thinking, "So your participation in this thread, and several others over the last ten months or so, has been, by your own admission, complete bullshit, and we'll ignore your years-long relevant record, as well."
Such as it is, your perpetual unreliability is why nobody really knows what to tell you: Are you missing something? Yeah, pretty much everything, and that's pretty much every day, and it pretty much seems like missing the point is all you're capable of.
So are you misinterpreting something? Sure: Everything. Because you're a sniveling, covetous, wannabe. On this occasion you answer your own question: What conclusion are you supposed to draw? Is it that you're defining the word "conclusion" strangely—we wouldn't know, since you never put any effort into telling us—or is the question a result of your own fallacious structural demand, which has been haunting you throught your months-long revenge fantasy? That is to say, why would you demand conclusions?
Stop objectifying people so much: When you're having a discussion with them, they do play their own role; if you need actors to play the parts you want them to, start a theatre troupe.
Not all data leads immediately to conclusions. I would expect someone who pretends to be an educator to know that, but you are, as you have repeately informed us, pursuing other priorities, so why would anyone expect rational, reliable discourse from someone whose functional posture is that he is such an effing ignoramus the world needs to stop and admire and accommodate his every demand?
So, you know—
—spare us the whimpering distraction. You want a conclusion? You made a sexism comparison amid your temper tantrum in ; Birch responded in #18↑. What are you misinterpreting? Oh, the discussion. The other member. Pretty much everything, just like you do.
See, the thing is that nobody is quite certain what the hell your tantrum at #17 is actually about, but your compairson is what leads to Birch's response:
Who gives a fuck about them is a pretty dumb question. If it's such a problem and you give such a damn, and you're an educator at a university, then start a support group to explain to all those men how they need to quit drinking so much, not accept an open container drink from anyone else, stop showing bare arms above the elbow or legs below the knee, and when I was younger there were a lot of people that said a lot of stuff about tattoos and morality, so they probably shouldn't get inked so as to not encourage a rapist. Haircut? Okay, really, how many of us are jumped on the street like this? Will it add to our culpability in our own rape if we were listening to music or attending something on our mobile phone? If nobody is putting the men through it, and you're so worried about their equality, then this is something you can address on your campus and in your community, and stop whining at everyone else like you're just some clueless troll bawling in hopes of disrupting the neighborhood.
Or would you prefer a more realistic answer? Who gives a fuck about them is a pretty dumb question. If it's such a problem and you give such a damn, and you're an educator at a university, then start a support and advocacy group on campus. Complaining about women isn't what we would call effective ... productive ... useful ...whatever. In my lifetime, the sum effect of men complaining about women has been the discrediting of traditional masculinity and masculine supreacism as a societal virtues, and that's well and fine in its own aspect, but there are and were better ways to effect such changes.
Well, unless we intend to plead that we just can't help ourselves. Which, in turn, probably isn't a good idea.
―End Part I―
Part the Second
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Click for a much lighter and total change of subject.
So at the end of the day, if you wish to pretend concern for the frat boys who wake with something up their asses, then get on the trolley about sexual violence, and stop with the pretentiously seething revenge campaign against women and their ilk. Stop trying to define men according to your fear and loathing of women. The truth is, you present yourself like a lot of trolls: Passionate advocates deeply invested in a subject they have given approximately zero study and seem to know virtually nothing about.
Here is as straightforward a tip as I can manage presently, according to the pretense that your posture of ignorance is, in fact, genuine: You actually share a common aspect with some of the people you disagree wtih; Know Your IX makes a similar error; the longer question of why universities are dealing with this stuff in the first place is important. KYIX does in fact explain the relevance of Title IX according to institutional handling of crime, but similar to your inquiry, why it was that way in the first place seems absent from their discussion. But that's the thing; their perspective survivor-based, their purpose straightforward and functional, and in the end, they're not making the same argumentative mistakes in their application as you do. Then again, they are on, quite literally, about survival. You, to the other, are on about some personal identity politic.
Bob Jones University provides a relatively recent example. The public gives such schools a lot of heat about their strange morality codes, but in the end, such schools are generally allowed to have such codes. And this is what society has tried to not tread on, except now we do, and for obvious reasons.
I went to a Jesuit high school. One of our female students was raped and turned up pregnant as a result. The Jesuits, walking the path they believe Christ described, expelled her for violating the school's Christian-moral policy. And neither the Jesuits in general nor that high school in particular are somehow unique.
I don't know if they have so strict stupid a moral code; but there's a Jesuit university of some athletic fame, as well, and I would hope they've come a long way over the last quarter-century, too. Still, though, consider the idea of a female student, raped. At some schools, the fact that she's not pregnant means she won't be forced out of school; in some of those, it's that she won't be forced out of school as long as nobody finds out she was raped. You were, by the way, asking about inequality? In some cases, the point is to get an abortion without anyone finding out, and nobody can ever know she was raped, or else she will be forced out of school, anyway.
And this goes way back. The United States Department of Education was officially founded in 1979; it's a couple hundred years late, in American historical terms, compared to institutional moral codes at colleges and universities.
In the long run, as with any supremacism, American progress comes in small, irregular bits.
And, yes, the frat boys waking up with pains in the ass will benefit from this, too: Male students won't face the prospect of being expelled for reporting their involvement homosexual conduct.
And as with all of that, look, when it comes to the question of reporting rapes against men, we need to know, so we can deal with it, both specifically and in more thematic address. Like I said↑: Why universities? Stupid traditionalism. And the way to break stupid traditionalism is to watch it rapidly degrade in sunlight. The glaring fault in Birch's↑ opening paragraph analysis of victimization, for instance, is the lack of evidence that we cannot posture as evidence of lack. The rest of it is informal, and the challenge there is to reconcile the intuitive with the real; when it comes to recognizing historical themes, there are plenty whose outlook would seem to nearly perfectly fail. Your point about social impetus is valid in its own—that is to say, another—context, but it actually halfway changes the subject while halfway making the point. It would probably be easier, for instance, if you just outlined whatever the hell it is you're on about instead of trying to pursue it through a pretense of rage wrapped in naïveté wrapped in barren and hopeless ignorance. That is to say, you're asking primer questions, but doing so in a way that, functionally speaking, generally precludes building any useful framework; it starts to read as if you're bawling just for the sake of complaining.
Still, though, nobody is quite certain what to say about the masculine rituals of high school athletes raping their teammates into the hospital; I would probably prefer to not imagine frat party male bonding through ritual rape of one another. In the end, pitching a tantrum about Title IX in order to throw down #WhatAboutTheMen is going to draw the obvious response. To the rape survivor, rape is what it is. As a masculinist identity politic, the overwhelming majority of the structural problems in our society, traditions, and general customs, that contribute to the genuine problems society encounters in dealign with sex crime victimization of males is, as a masculine collective, self-inflicted. Look, I get that the customs suck, but in this society, we men were driving them the whole time. It's one thing to say we're done with them, but we don't get to take this out on women in general. And, you know, it's also true that we have the power to change these customs; for whatever reason, we don't ever get around to that part with these issues, though I'm still absolutely dazzled by the innovation that two men dating and repeatedly engaging in homosexual contact with one another is an affirmation of masculine heterosexuality.
Still, when these aspects become comparative with even the slightest whiff of the War of the Sexes, people who actually pay attention to what's going on generally notice. For all you complain about identity politics, you might want to consider dropping the identity politics.
There are, in fact, a real issues in play, here. What is your priority?
Are you forgetting that you started this thread, and that the subject is essentially DeVos's efforts to turn the accused perpetrators into the "victims"?
They can. But again, if they go to local cops after they have been raped, it's too late. (And if they go to cops beforehand and say "you know, this frat has scary posters for their parties" the cops are going to remind them that that's not illegal.)
Yes, some do. Most do not because they do a good job teaching prevention.
Right! Just like prohibition worked.
Fortunately most people are smarter than that.
They do, and good colleges do as well.
In some places they are. In some they are not. Which is the point.
In some cases, yes.
If it's a sexual assault - if one guy, in the presence of witnesses, pulls off a women's shirt and gropes her, then by all means go to the police.
If it's a frat where many women are groped, but no one wants to press charges, then it falls more on the university to do something about it.
Better to be paying lawsuits than dealing with rape cases.
Maybe rape causes drinking?
Try that one out in public. Go up to anyone in the real world (i.e. not on the Internet) and explain that one. I am thinking perhaps you need to get out of your mom's basement and experience what people actually do and say in the real world, and what's acceptable and what's not.
Yes please lets go back to that! The ACCUSED are entitle to legal rights for which the department of education is not the proper facility for ascertaining their guilt.
well if that is what everyone else is thinking they are wrong.
So you have nothing to say then, just insults and slander?
temper tantrum? dude look in the mirror right now.
Oh but I have been, and I'm part of organizations that do, thank you for asking. What do you do IRL to help others?
OK how is asking for all accusation of rape be handled by the justice department so that university don't keep getting sued... complaining about women? Be solution orientated an tell me what is your solution for this problem?
Still no clue what your talking about.
Revenge against women?
Not being sexually attracted to women anymore is "fear and loathing of women"?
More slander. Look I'm going to ask questions, because I trying to make sense of what your saying, now you can either keep slandering me, or answer my questions until we come to a mutual understanding.
Yeah you lost me again here. If this is an issue of survival I would think this is serious crime worthy of federal courts, not a college tribunal.
So are you saying colleges can have their own morality codes, that if students break they can expelled that student, then why involve the government with Title IX? If the college expels someone for what they moralize as rape, but that the justice department does not, why call it rape?
So are your saying as long as we let religious schools kick women out for being pregnant, we must allow public university kick men out for what ever accusation is made against them by female students? My argument would be both would eventually fold in this day and age under mounting lawsuits.
not unless it is a religious college?
I thought I did repeatedly: Have the justice department deal with all accusations of sexual assault, fuck tradition, as you say by rapid degradation of sunlight, or take tradition out back and shove a boom stick up its ass, I don't care, what eve way just end it.
Don't ask me, have not a clue, like when teenage girls nag each other into eating disorders, it is all beyond me.
Yeah so? Are you saying it is up to men to fix it? It is not like we have a democracy in which it is up to men and women to vote and make laws to deal with these things, no we must go to the elders of the patriarchy! So instead of making laws like acknowledging that men can be raped, providing services for male rape victims at a state and federal levels, we should blame "masculinity" and wipe our hands?
Are you saying women had no power to sway, even drive customs? For example when the Norms took over England, they married English women, the English language was doomed, except it was not for the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. To proclaim women lacked power and agency since time began is to proclaim women as fundamentally weak and infantile and I refuse to believe that.
What the fuck is with this takes this out on women strawman, you quote me, directly not a linke, lets go over where I'm taking this out on women.
I don't know what your talking about nor do I think I want to know what your talking about, if your trying the challenge my masculinity, good luck, I'm a bronie that faps to fury porn. I don't care about any ones standards of masculinity, I have my own personal standards.
Yeah that where you miss the point, when the left side with women on said war, the Republican take up the men, and as it turns out the women too as long as they are white, and make gain with everyone so long as they are dejected by the democrat platforms dropping everything for the poor college women, excuse me I assume her gender, college xmyen. Now here we have a moderate position lime mine, have the justice department deal with all cases of rape on campus, and your reply is to calm I'm attacking women or something, that right there is the kind of behavior that has cost us the election.
Well at a larger level it is to not loss utterly and miserably to a pig boar and his party of effete rich assholes siting on the shoulders of the nation's marching morons, but for this thread I would like to suggest the solution of having the justice department dealing with all cases of sexual assault on campus.
aah what? scary posters?
Well if no one is pressing charges what is the problem? If you got groped and did not want to, you should press charges!
That money coming out of my pocket so fuck you. Have the police deal with it so the university does not lose millions in law suits.
Oh you almost have it, just switch that around and we might be on are way to reducing rape on campus by having sober students.
I have, I advocate for a dry campus.
Step back a moment and think about what you are doing here. Honestly, you're sounding like one of those "Obama phone" nutters.
Is anyone here denying that the accused are entitled to the same rights that are, ostensibly, accorded to any and everybody else who is accused of a crime?
Are people falsely accused of rape? Sure. Is it a widespread problem? What do you think? Consider everything that this entails. I think that one can reasonably state the disruption, the invasion, the humiliation, etc. one must undergo to pursue a rape charge far surpasses that of just about any other criminal offense. For me, the question has always been "why do people bother reporting rape (all things considered)?", rather than "why is rape under-reported?"
Well then if we can all agree this should be the department of justice issue then this thread is over, so do we all agree?
Who knows! Only a few percentage of rapes are found guilty and only a few percentage of rape accusations are found to be proven false (as in the evidence was enough to charge the accuser for lying or the accuser recants) All the rest of the rapes, 80-90% remain in some nebulous zone of he-said-she-said.
Oh lets google "why do women lie about rape"
Lets see hit number one: https://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-bl...o-lied-about-being-raped-and-why-they-did-it/
OK clearly some women are willing to deal with the disruption, invasion and humiliation. All this is beside the point of the need for a court of law to decide all this. Consider murder where there is almost always a dead body, it is almost always undeniable someone was killed, and even then ~35% of murders go unsolved or acquittal (That include OJ Simpson by the way, the juice will be lose this Thursday!) in the USA. Yes this is not a perfect system but we long ago as a country agreed it was better to have type II errors (acquit the truly guilty) then type I error (convict the innocent) I think stuff like the Salem Witch trials scared us into this.
Do you find yourself identifying with that guy in Memento?
And did you skip U.S. Government in high school, or something?
Just when I thought we were going to be civil.
You should probably not be touching these issues until you find a cure for that ignorance. No, really, it's dangerous.
We're not talking Navajo Nation or the U.S. military here, so stop pretending otherwise. Issues of scope and breadth and whatnots could make for a legitimate discussion, but...
And as to the latter part (of post #36)--again, I'm not gonna indulge your wacky confabulations and transparent obtuseness.
Separate names with a comma.