Discussion: That sex without consent is always rape

Kadark:

No, that's not it at all, dick eater.
Click to expand...

I know you intend the term "dick eater" to be an insult. Therefore, I find it offensive. I will ask you, just once, not to insult me in such a manner again.

Thankyou.

Stop acting as if you know why I didn't agree to your bullshit proposal (like everybody else you challenged). I respect women enough to demand they fulfill their responsibilities, unlike such caring sweethearts like yourself. If you want to debate something else, I'm perfectly fine with that.
Click to expand...

Ok. How about we debate "A woman must give her husband sex if he wants it, whether she wants to or not"?

You, of course, will argue the affirmative side.

Do we have an agreement?

However, you must get it through your thick skull that I only agree to debate topics I have an interest in. I also reserve the right to deny a debate proposal as I see fit, regardless of what the fuck you have to say. Got it?
Click to expand...

Yes. You have already exercised your right not to participate in the current debate. So quit whining.

Kadark said:
James R said:
I have quoted some of your comments about rape in this very post, again, for the record.
Click to expand...

So? I wouldn't have posted them if I was afraid of them being quoted.
Click to expand...

Good for you. If only you'd had the guts to defend your comments in an actual debate.
 
angrybellsprout said:
Again James Retard comes with dishonesty instead of any sort of rebuttal of anything that I've actually stated.
Click to expand...

I'm getting sick of your accusations of dishonesty. In this latest one, I made no claims. I asked you two questions. So, I cannot have been dishonest.

I ask you not to make any further accusations of dishonesty against me unless and until you can document them by quoting the relevant posts.
 
This is coming from the same person who keeps claiming that I stated that nonconsentual sex is not rape?

Hillarious.
 
Randwolf and I are now in agreement on the issue, angrybellsprout, so I see no relevance to your quoting of his post.

Please go play somewhere else.
 
That you were dishonest in trying to claim that he ever stated that nonconsentual sex is not rape?

That is apperant to everyone.
 
Where did I claim that, ABS? Certainly not in the post you linked to. There, I invited 3 people to debate an issue. That is all.
 
No, you 'invited' people to play your little strawman game with.

You 'invited' people who you knew never once made the claim that you wanted them to defend.

It would be similar to me inviting you to defend the position that fucking a dog in the ass is a noble and just thing to do, while I stick up for the position that it is rape.

As far as I know you never made this claim, but I'm just going to attach it to you and if you don't defend it, then you are simply a coward.
 
James R said:
Many words are defined so as to be shorthand for complex concepts - strings of other words. The word rape is just one of them.

Can you think of any examples of sex without consent where the word "rape" would not apply, DeepThought?
Click to expand...


James R,

I think this issue demonstrates how hard it is for us to make judgments concerning the experience of others, and, consequently, how dangerous words like rape and racism can be.

If a poor farmer from the Third World is trod on by the system, and left unable to feed and care for his family - perhaps even losing some of his children due to lack of medical care - is he completely in the wrong if he forces a childless female executive of a large multinational whom the system has made wealthy to have sex with him - and maybe even slaps her around a bit while he's at it?

Rape 4. an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.
 
he is more than wrong. he is also a pussy
this is the way of the noble people.......

The Committee of Public Safety came under the control of Maximilien Robespierre, a lawyer, and the Jacobins unleashed the Reign of Terror (1793-1794). According to archival records, at least 16,594 people died under the guillotine or otherwise after accusations of counter-revolutionary activities

/not amused
 
angrybellsprout:

angrybellsprout said:
You 'invited' people who you knew never once made the claim that you wanted them to defend.
Click to expand...

Let us be clear then.

Do you agree that sex without consent is always rape?

Yes or no?

I am asking you which position you defend.
 
Lemme ask you something, Kadark. If you're so right, why can you not use reason like anyone else instead of stooping to calling people 'dick eater'?
 
OK children, so far this has been very productive. Except maybe 3-4 actually ontopic posts, the rest should be deleted so far as irrelevant bickering.

Anyway, here are a few problems to start with:

1. DEFINITION. What definition are we using?
2. GEOGRAPHY. Which country or state are we refering to, whose laws are being discussed here?
3. TIME. Are we talking about now, about Victorian England, etc. or universally?

1. The problem of the definition is twofold:

a. If we give a strict definition and we all agree to it, there is nothing left to debate. Analogy: Is a 2 dimensional shape consisting points with equal distance from a particular point is always a circle? If we give the definition of circle like this:"Circle is a 2 dimensional shape consisting of those points in a plane which are at a constant distance from a fixed point." When everyone agrees, there is no point in debating what the circle is.
My point here is that I need a little leeway with the definition.

b. James' usage of "always" in the moral question. If I can show at least one occasion when the sexual attack without consent could be considered something else rather than rape, the answer is no, and I win the debate.

#2 and #3 are selfexplanatory, so I don't need to explain them....
 
Last edited:
OK, I will give some definitions here, from my mind and Wikipedia:

Rape (1): sometimes called sexual assault, is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with or sexual penetration of another person without their consent.

Rape (2): physical attack when one is being forced against his/her will to engage in sexual activity.

I am open to other, similar definitions. Again, the problem is with #1 that there is nothing left to argue, as James' moral question is stated. Although here I am going to throw in one of my weapons:

Spousal rape! It all boils down to the definition of consent in the context of rape. Just about half of the world even today consideres MARRIAGE being an institution that gives long term consent to the spouse to use the other's body for sexual activities. 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... :)
 
Syzygys said:
Spousal rape! It all boils down to the definition of consent in the context of rape. Just about half of the world even today consideres MARRIAGE being an institution that gives long term consent to the spouse to use the other's body for sexual activities. 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...

It's still rape because it was AGAINST HER WILL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top