Discussion: That sex without consent is always rape

Wifey: Oh hubby dearest please accept this stick up your arse as a token of my affection.
Hubby: Whaa. Get that fucking thing away from my anus!
Wifey: But darling we are married and doing this to you would really turn me on right now.
Hubby: But that's a serious sexual assault!
Wifey: Not legally it isn't now BEND OVER!!
 
Bells said:
Syzygys, please be advised
Click to expand...

Damn! Should I copy the posts there? I told you this subforum was anal...

Anyway, I will switch to that thread, I let you children play here....
 
Also, Syzygys, I refer you to rule #7 of the team debating rules, which you agreed to when you agreed to this debate.

That rule says that a poster may post a maximum of 4 posts in the entire debate - one each round.

In fact, you have already used your quota with your initial string of posts.

I am happy to overlook this and merge your initial posts into one larger posts, but I ask you to review the rules for the debate.

Lastly, if you think this is "anal", I really wonder why you agreed to the debate in the first place. Nobody forced you into it, you know. Regardless of your opinions on the process, this is a formal debate, conducted according to pre-agreed rules. You were invited to negotiate the parameters of the debate before the start, and you raised no objections about the format then.
 
james i was just assuming he was alowed 3 posts a round cause hes on his own and we are a team:p
 
Syzygys said:
Thus even if the husband forces the wife to have sex with him against her will, legally it can not be considered rape.

Oups! Did I just win the debate? That was fast, but I told you I was good... :)
Click to expand...


umm
cos she consented?
so sex without consent (marriage) is indeed rape?

scoring points for the other team?
 
Asguard said:
james i was just assuming he was alowed 3 posts a round cause hes on his own and we are a team:p
Click to expand...

In the Proposal thread, I offered a one-one-one debate. He said he didn't mind debating 3 people.
 
James R said:
That rule says that a poster may post a maximum of 4 posts in the entire debate - one each round.
Click to expand...

I forgot to mention I am above the rules... Also, without me there wouldn't be a debate at all....Nobody wanted to take your challenge...

I am happy to overlook this and merge your initial posts into one larger posts,
Click to expand...

Sure. I pretty much already said what I wanted, although I still have a few fun case studies...

but I ask you to review the rules for the debate.
Click to expand...

real man don't read instructions...

Asguard's point me being alone against 3 is valid, should't I be allowed more responses??? Anyway, as I said I made most of my points...

Where is my prize?
 
Last edited:
Since there is a chance my post will be removed from the debate thread because of the silly rules I will use this thread as filesaving. So here it is:

Case study #5: From the Mumbai Times:

"No charges against the Serial Pleasurer!

No charges were filed against the so called Serial Pleasurer, because none of her victims are willing to do so. In the infamous case of Sam, a secretary of Dr. Loveguru, the famous sexual psychologist, she gained unauthorized access to the files of his boss' clients and collected the names of women unable to orgasm. In a course of 5 weeks she kidnapped 6 of them, tied them down, and after a long, nice bodymassage she brought them to multiple climaxes, digitally. After that she released them otherwise unharmed, but cured. Lawyers for Sam argued that she might be guilty of kidnapping but not rape, because she was just practicing medicine without a medical license. Several of the kidnapped women were also ready to defend Sam, including their husbands. The police say no harm, no crime, although they warned Sam not to do it again. Sam opened up a "healthclinic" treating women with orgasm issues using bodymassage. Her clinic is booked for the next 2 decades...."
 
syzygys no one deleted your post, the whole thing is still there. All james did was merge the 4 of them into one post because everyone gets only one post per round.
 
I got food poisoning from lunching at the in-law's. My husband and I are never, ever, eating gravy again. Will do my round 2 post tomorrow.

:bawl:

Need to go lie down now. Been :puke: since this afternoon.

:(
 
Bells said:
I got food poisoning from lunching at the in-law's. My husband and I are never, ever, eating gravy again. Will do my round 2 post tomorrow.

:bawl:

Need to go lie down now. Been :puke: since this afternoon.

:(
Click to expand...

Hope you get better soon Bells..
Your in-laws eh.. ? Jeez.
 
sniffy said:
Wifey: Oh hubby dearest please accept this stick up your arse as a token of my affection.
Hubby: Whaa. Get that fucking thing away from my anus!
Wifey: But darling we are married and doing this to you would really turn me on right now.
Hubby: But that's a serious sexual assault!
Wifey: Not legally it isn't now BEND OVER!!
Click to expand...

Anyone gonna answer sniffy's post?

And ya, Bells, hope you get better soon. That sucks.
 
You know it is rape, I know it is rape, but Syzygys is still trying to argue that marital rape is somehow not rape because of a legal definition.
 
As soon as one party becomes incapable of having rational consent due to drink or drugs, the crime of rape is questionable.
An intoxicated woman (or man) is an easy target for a rapist because proving non-consent is difficult.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
As soon as one party becomes incapable of having rational consent due to drink or drugs, the crime of rape is questionable.
An intoxicated woman (or man) is an easy target for a rapist because proving non-consent is difficult.
Click to expand...

errr if intoxicated one cannot give rational consent.......if you were sober kremmen you would know this
 
sniffy said:
errr if intoxicated one cannot give rational consent.......if you were sober kremmen you would know this
Click to expand...

Where do you draw the line with rational consent though?

If someone is pissed/stoned to the point of not knowing what thy're doing or saying, nope, rational consent is indeed right out the window. But if they're only pissed enough to disinhibit what desires are already there?
 
visceral_instinct said:
Where do you draw the line with rational consent though?

If someone is pissed/stoned to the point of not knowing what thy're doing or saying, nope, rational consent is indeed right out the window. But if they're only pissed enough to disinhibit what desires are already there?
Click to expand...


This is why I've long suspected that women who get drunk or stoned are not that bothered about being raped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top