Support NeoGAF

[AdventureRacing]

My main problem with calling it rape is trying to assign equivalent punishment for it.

Let's say Chris and Mandy make the adult decision to have sex. Mandy tells Chris that she wants him to wear a condom. Chris says okay, but intentionally has unprotected sex with her anyways. Let's say for whatever reason Mandy was unaware that it was unprotected. After the fact, Mandy realizes that Chris didn't put on a condom.


I don't think it would be a good idea to have Chris bear the full weight of rape charges. Is Chris a shitty person? Yes. Should be liable to face legal troubles for his actions? Yes. But it is my opinion that a rape conviction is excessive. A lot of this has to do with how I feel about our legal system in general. I'll admit that my view on this can be flawed. But my feeling is that somebody who goes out and rapes people in the typical instance of rape is somebody who is largely incurable. At that point, it is just best to protect our society from this person. My feeling is that Chris' case may not fall into that. I would like for there to be a lighter sentencing that essentially says "You fucked up bad and you're gonna pay for this, but we're not going to lock you up for half your life over it."

You're potentially putting someone at risk of serious STD's which can have lifelong consequences not to mention the risk or pregnancy. Is it as bad as forcing yourself on someone totally against their consent? Maybe, I'm not sure how you even quantify that. Considering the consequences I'm pretty fine with it having an incredibly severe punishment.

 

[Two Words]

Girl bitch WHAT? Chris potentially exposed Mandy to a host of sexually transmitted diseases-- not to mention a fucking FETUS that SHE would have to remove HERSELF against all political odds. How is that not invasive/rapey?

My main concern is how it is punished. I'm not entirely sure that it should carry identical punishment for the reasons I said above. You bring up a good point about STDs and pregnancies. I guess I was only considering cases where there were not STD transmissions or pregnancies.

 

[2Smashed4U]

My main problem with calling it rape is trying to assign equivalent punishment for it.

Let's say Chris and Mandy make the adult decision to have sex. Mandy tells Chris that she wants him to wear a condom. Chris says okay, but intentionally has unprotected sex with her anyways. Let's say for whatever reason Mandy was unaware that it was unprotected. After the fact, Mandy realizes that Chris didn't put on a condom.


I don't think it would be a good idea to have Chris bear the full weight of rape charges. Is Chris a shitty person? Yes. Should be liable to face legal troubles for his actions? Yes. But it is my opinion that a rape conviction is excessive. A lot of this has to do with how I feel about our legal system in general. I'll admit that my view on this can be flawed. But my feeling is that somebody who goes out and rapes people in the typical instance of rape is somebody who is largely incurable. At that point, it is just best to protect our society from this person. My feeling is that Chris' case may not fall into that. I would like for there to be a lighter sentencing that essentially says "You fucked up bad and you're gonna pay for this, but we're not going to lock you up for half your life over it."

no

 

[Deepwater]

My main problem with calling it rape is trying to assign equivalent punishment for it.

Let's say Chris and Mandy make the adult decision to have sex. Mandy tells Chris that she wants him to wear a condom. Chris says okay, but intentionally has unprotected sex with her anyways. Let's say for whatever reason Mandy was unaware that it was unprotected. After the fact, Mandy realizes that Chris didn't put on a condom.


I don't think it would be a good idea to have Chris bear the full weight of rape charges. Is Chris a shitty person? Yes. Should be liable to face legal troubles for his actions? Yes. But it is my opinion that a rape conviction is excessive. A lot of this has to do with how I feel about our legal system in general. I'll admit that my view on this can be flawed. But my feeling is that somebody who goes out and rapes people in the typical instance of rape is somebody who is largely incurable. At that point, it is just best to protect our society from this person. My feeling is that Chris' case may not fall into that. I would like for there to be a lighter sentencing that essentially says "You fucked up bad and you're gonna pay for this, but we're not going to lock you up for half your life over it."

"this isn't THAT kind of rape so it's not REALLY rape"

fuck off

 

[Slayven]

My main problem with calling it rape is trying to assign equivalent punishment for it.

Let's say Chris and Mandy make the adult decision to have sex. Mandy tells Chris that she wants him to wear a condom. Chris says okay, but intentionally has unprotected sex with her anyways. Let's say for whatever reason Mandy was unaware that it was unprotected. After the fact, Mandy realizes that Chris didn't put on a condom.


I don't think it would be a good idea to have Chris bear the full weight of rape charges. Is Chris a shitty person? Yes. Should be liable to face legal troubles for his actions? Yes. But it is my opinion that a rape conviction is excessive. A lot of this has to do with how I feel about our legal system in general. I'll admit that my view on this can be flawed. But my feeling is that somebody who goes out and rapes people in the typical instance of rape is somebody who is largely incurable. At that point, it is just best to protect our society from this person. My feeling is that Chris' case may not fall into that. I would like for there to be a lighter sentencing that essentially says "You fucked up bad and you're gonna pay for this, but we're not going to lock you up for half your life over it."

Chris is probably a piece of shit that done it to others, potentially exposing Mandy to STDs, and not to mention pregnancy. It can have life long consequences just like a beat upside the head rape.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

My main problem with calling it rape is trying to assign equivalent punishment for it.

Let's say Chris and Mandy make the adult decision to have sex. Mandy tells Chris that she wants him to wear a condom. Chris says okay, but intentionally has unprotected sex with her anyways. Let's say for whatever reason Mandy was unaware that it was unprotected. After the fact, Mandy realizes that Chris didn't put on a condom.


I don't think it would be a good idea to have Chris bear the full weight of rape charges. Is Chris a shitty person? Yes. Should be liable to face legal troubles for his actions? Yes. But it is my opinion that a rape conviction is excessive. A lot of this has to do with how I feel about our legal system in general. I'll admit that my view on this can be flawed. But my feeling is that somebody who goes out and rapes people in the typical instance of rape is somebody who is largely incurable. At that point, it is just best to protect our society from this person. My feeling is that Chris' case may not fall into that. I would like for there to be a lighter sentencing that essentially says "You fucked up bad and you're gonna pay for this, but we're not going to lock you up for half your life over it."

Why are you the arbiter of consent and how it works?

 

[Gattsu25]

okay so all you dime store fuckbaskets here's the thing

if someone doesn't consent to something, it's rape

if you think something might be rape, it is rape

if you have to ask yourself "is there the slightest hint they'd say no to what i'm about to do", it's rape

just because a woman has agreed to have sex that night does not mean you're free to whatever you want sexually to her "because she wanted sex already".

if a someone says they want sex but you need to use a condom, use the condom. sneaking the condom off is rape. they consented to condomed sex, not condomless sex.

if someone says they only want to make out, and you jam your fingers into their genitals because you want to "take control", you just raped them.

if a husband makes a wife have sex with them simply because they are married, it's rape. agreeing to marriage isn't agreeing to unlimited sex access. in fact, it has a specific term for the glade sniffers out there, marital rape.


okay, if you're gonna be pulling out edge cases, so here we go

if she says she wants a threesome with you and another guy, and you sneak in another guy into the room and have him have sex with her because you think it's funny, it's rape. Just because they consented to sex, consented to sex with multiple men, they did not consent to having sex with whatever multiple men you decided to change it to without their knowledge

so repeating again, get it through your heads

read it five times

sex and/or intimate touching without consent is rape.

consenting to sex and then having your consented-to-parameters changed is rape.

people can consent to narrowed parameters for how they want to do sex. Just because someone likes orgasms does not mean they will accept any orgasm forced upon them.

you can also orgasm while being raped. it's not something you can control.

consent can be withdrawn at any moment, time, by anyone, for any reason, and if you continue past it's rape. if you're balls deep inside her and about to explode and she says she's done, you pull out. "i just need to finish real quick" and keeping going is rape. Because the consent was withdrawn. This happens even in long relationships. It doesn't matter how much food you've given, money given, how many years together, you are at no time ever for a single god damn tick tock of the motherfucking grandfather clock of universal time ever entitled to access to another person's body for any reason what so ever.

no, "am i a rapist then if the condom broke by accident" replies,because that's not rape, that's an accident.

"do i need to ask her for consent for every little thing" affirmative consent is an awesome thing to practice. If you feel it's a burden to obtain consent, then stop having sex with other people because you're a god damn creep. Consent isn't always verbal.if you're heavy kissing in bed and you go "you want some of this d, babe?" and they nod yes, congrats you obtained consent. it isn't a goddamn field trip permission slip process like some people think it is. if you don't ask because you think they might say no or don't want to do it, you are on the highway to being a rapist, you chucklefuckasaurus rex.

women are already in a unique position of having to trust someone on average twice their size and strength when they want sex at a really vulnerable moment both physically and emotionally. and statistically,

hold on for it

most rape is committed by someone they know or love

so people trying to barter maybe-rape chips back and forth like "i dunno about that.. realllly" becaue they're more concerned about getting their fucking penis wet and badge unlocked that they forget there is a PERSON on the other side of this, get fucking consent. don't be a creep. don't be a rapist. all you have to do to not rape is simply not rape someone. it's not even complicated.


and goddamn every single time with the replies it's "but what if this woman does this" like you're trying to both sides this shit,

1) YOU NEVER SHOW UP IN MALE VICTIMS OF RAPES THREADS. IN FACT HALF THE TIME YOU POST THE FUCKING "NIIIIICE" JPG. There are male survivors on GAF that have literally given up participating in those threads because it's a tidal wave of "niiiice" and "he got some". Seriously. You. Never. Show. Up. When. Other. Men. Actually. Need . Supporters. It's all about "those fucking women and their rape card". Seriously just search for threads with rape in the title, ones about women will have a bunch of dudes running in to say women can rape too and pretty much just that line, while male ones are niiiice.jpg, what did she look like, welliwouldhadsexwithmyteachertoo, etc etc you actually almost NEVER EVER see those "women can be rapists too" posts in there. huh. strange. interesting.


if people spent half the time they do trying to categorize rapiness on their rapescale on obtaining consent, the world would be a much better place for everyone. Nobody would lose! NOBODY! LITERALLY NO DOWNSIDES TO OBTAINING AFFIRMATIVE CONSENT, EVER

Fucking. THIS.

 

[Poor GRIMES]

My main concern is how it is punished.

Yeah, well, that much is clear.

 

[dragonlife]

I'm glad this is getting more mainstream attention. It's definitely a thing in the gay community's underbelly, but it's not exclusive to it. It's mostly about spreading HIV.

There is another similar concept called bug chasing, but with that, the people do it knowingly/with consent (spreading HIV; giving or receiving). Compared to stealthing, bug chasing seems like a small thing, merely because every party is aware.

I actually just went to a blog where stealthing stuff is prevalent to post screens for some of you (text), but I saw it was closed. His Twitter is also "offline" now, but I still see tweets.

For example, this was the header for his how-to guide on stealthing: how to do it, what to do if you get caught, etc. It was sickeningly in-depth:

The more people know about this, the better. Hopefully it can become punishable by law.

I can't even remember how I stumbled upon this shit, but I'm glad I did because it was a wake-up call, and I shared it with some friends so they could get educated.

 

[FTF]

That is fucked up...there are too many fucked up people in this world.

 

[Two Words]

"this isn't THAT kind of rape so it's not REALLY rape"

fuck off

I'm not really arguing about whether or not it is rape. My only concern is about how it is punished. My view is that we shouldn't lock people in jail for half or all of their life unless they are clearly an incurable threat to society.

Chris is probably a piece of shit that done it to others, potentially exposing Mandy to STDs, and not to mention pregnancy. It can have life long consequences just like a beat upside the head rape.

Yeah, I said in an earlier post that I agree that things like STDs and pregnancy are other factors to this. Obviously, if one of those happened, the consequences for that action would be far worse. I actually think that our laws don't do enough to punish those who knowingly transmit an STD to an unknowing partner.

Why are you the arbiter of consent and how it works?

What?

1. I never said a word about what is and is not consent.

2. I never said I am the arbiter of anything. I just said how I feel about it. I literally admitted that my view on it could be flawed. I'm just honestly giving my view of it right now. Maybe it will change later.

 

[FyreWulff]

My main problem with calling it rape is trying to assign equivalent punishment for it.

Let's say Chris and Mandy make the adult decision to have sex. Mandy tells Chris that she wants him to wear a condom. Chris says okay, but intentionally has unprotected sex with her anyways. Let's say for whatever reason Mandy was unaware that it was unprotected. After the fact, Mandy realizes that Chris didn't put on a condom.

It's still rape. Rape can look like no physical permanent changed happened, however, a rape still occurred.

rape victims can orgasm and even feel apparent pleasure during the act. it's still a rape even then. just straight up if you have the idea you need to "trick" someone into something involving sex you've already acknowledged you don't care about consent

 

[Deepwater]

I'm not really arguing about whether or not it is rape. My only concern is about how it is punished. My view is that we shouldn't lock people in jail for half or all of their life unless they are clearly an incurable threat to society.

My main problem with calling it rape

ok

 

[Two Words]

It's still rape. Rape can look like no physical permanent changed happened, however, a rape still occurred.

I'm not saying don't call it rape. I am saying that my problem is that since we can define it as rape, it should carry 100% identical legal punishment as rape.

ok

Keep reading beyond a sentence fragment?

 

[Deepwater]

I'm not saying don't call it rape. I am saying that my problem saying that since we can define it as rape, it should carry 100% identical legal punishment as rape.

like I said before to someone else, this isn't a damn court of law.

I'm not saying don't call it rape. I am saying that my problem is that since we can define it as rape, it should carry 100% identical legal punishment as rape.



Keep reading beyond a sentence fragment?

You said explicitly one thing, and when called out on it said that you actually didn't mean what you explicitly said. Fix your own damn wording.

"I don't know if I'd call it rape because I don't think it's as criminal as my idea of rape"

 

[Imm0rt4l]

I'm not really arguing about whether or not it is rape. My only concern is about how it is punished. My view is that we shouldn't lock people in jail for half or all of their life unless they are clearly an incurable threat to society.



Yeah, I said in an earlier post that I agree that things like STDs and pregnancy are other factors to this. Obviously, if one of those happened, the consequences for that action would be far worse. I actually think that our laws don't do enough to punish those who knowingly transmit an STD to an unknowing partner.



What?

1. I never said a word about what is and is not consent.

2. I never said I am the arbiter of anything. I just said how I feel about it. I literally admitted that my view on it could be flawed. I'm just honestly giving my view of it right now. Maybe it will change later.

You really need to take a step back and de-center men from this conversation. Won't someone please think of the rapists? You seem to have more sympathy for the person doing the violating then the actual victim. Dudes stay caping for other men's terrible behavior and wonder why women are disgusting if men. Seriously, look at your life.

 

[Two Words]

like I said before to someone else, this isn't a damn court of law.

I never said GAF is the court of law.

I get why you are upset, but I don't think I am carrying the view that you think I am carrying. I'm going to ask that you take a moment to re-evaluate what it is that I am saying. Because even if you don't agree with me, I don't think I am saying something as heinous as you may think I am.

 

[FyreWulff]

I'm not saying don't call it rape. I am saying that my problem is that since we can define it as rape, it should carry 100% identical legal punishment as rape.

"what about the rapists and their feelings" is what this is

if you don't want to spend half your life in the slammer, don't rape. it's pretty easy to not rape. you simply just don't rape someone.

 

[Gattsu25]

Keep reading beyond a sentence fragment?

Beyond that sentence fragment is you basically saying "I'm not saying it's not rape but it shouldn't carry the same penalty as real rape"

I mean, that's the gist of it, no? It's harsher than what you're saying but that is your argument.

 

[Deepwater]

I never said GAF is the court of law.

I get why you are upset, but I don't think I am carrying the view that you think I am carrying. I'm going to ask that you take a moment to re-evaluate what it is that I am saying. Because even if you don't agree with me, I don't think I am saying something as heinous as you may think I am.

if you engage in acts of sexual penetration that are not consensual then it's rape. Maybe you should realize what your devils advocate headassery is implying.

 

[RS4-]

Nah, lock em up. Don't need shitty people like that that ruin lives.

 

[Moosichu]

My main problem with calling it rape is trying to assign equivalent punishment for it.

Let's say Chris and Mandy make the adult decision to have sex. Mandy tells Chris that she wants him to wear a condom. Chris says okay, but intentionally has unprotected sex with her anyways. Let's say for whatever reason Mandy was unaware that it was unprotected. After the fact, Mandy realizes that Chris didn't put on a condom.


I don't think it would be a good idea to have Chris bear the full weight of rape charges. Is Chris a shitty person? Yes. Should be liable to face legal troubles for his actions? Yes. But it is my opinion that a rape conviction is excessive. A lot of this has to do with how I feel about our legal system in general. I'll admit that my view on this can be flawed. But my feeling is that somebody who goes out and rapes people in the typical instance of rape is somebody who is largely incurable. At that point, it is just best to protect our society from this person. My feeling is that Chris' case may not fall into that. I would like for there to be a lighter sentencing that essentially says "You fucked up bad and you're gonna pay for this, but we're not going to lock you up for half your life over it."

This strawman is a big problem, most rape isn't like this. And yes, violent rape is different from non-violent rape. But they are both still rape, and both can cause long term physical and psychological trauma.

Also, context matters in all crimes, yet people see many people fervently trying to redefine theft.

"Yes, he did take your valuables without your permission, damage your property and leave, but you invited him in (even though you said don't take anything), so it's not really theft, more like enthusiastic borrowing."

 

[Imm0rt4l]

I never said GAF is the court of law.

I get why you are upset, but I don't think I am carrying the view that you think I am carrying. I'm going to ask that you take a moment to re-evaluate what it is that I am saying. Because even if you don't agree with me, I don't think I am saying something as heinous as you may think I am.

What you are trying to do is mitigate the consequences of rape. That's your focus here. Think about that.

 

[Two Words]

You really need to take a step back and de-center men from this conversation. Won't someone please think of the rapists? You seem to have more sympathy for the person doing the violating then the actual victim. Dudes stay caping for other men's terible behavior and wonder why women are disgusting if men. Seriously, look at your life.

I can see how it sounds like I am being sympathetic to rapists. I hope people don't read what I am saying to mean that. I'll try again to assert this point. I am not trying to be sympathetic to them. My point is more about the role prisons have in our society. I am carrying an assumption here, and maybe that assumption is wrong. I won't argue I know I'm right. But I feel that a rapist in the "pick a target and rape a woman" case is an incurable person who needs to be removed from society and a rapist in the "removed his condom during sex without consent" case is likely a curable person.

Some of this is going to come down to opinions on the role people want prison to have on our society.

 

[Deepwater]

I can see how it sounds like I am being sympathetic to rapists. I hope people don't read what I am saying to mean that. I'll try again to assert this point. I am not trying to be sympathetic to them. My point is more about the role prisons have in our society. I am carrying an assumption here, and maybe that assumption is wrong. I won't argue I know I'm right. But I feel that a rapist in the "pick a target and rape a woman" case is an incurable person who needs to be removed from society and a rapist in the "removed his condom during sex without consent" case is likely a curable person.

Some of this is going to come down to opinions on the role people want prison to have on our society.

you need to educate yourself on the realities of sexual violence. Lucky for you there are already several posts in this thread that get into it, but GOOGLE is always available.

 

[Moosichu]

I can see how it sounds like I am being sympathetic to rapists. I hope people don't read what I am saying to mean that. I'll try again to assert this point. I am not trying to be sympathetic to them. My point is more about the role prisons have in our society. I am carrying an assumption here, and maybe that assumption is wrong. I won't argue I know I'm right. But I feel that a rapist in the "pick a target and rape a woman" case is an incurable person who needs to be removed from society and a rapist in the "removed his condom during sex without consent" case is likely a curable person.

Some of this is going to come down to opinions on the role people want prison to have on our society.

That's not this debate though, this is more the role justice systems should play. And of course a well-functioning justice system should take the context of the crimes, the criminals and victims into account when determining what to do.

That's orthogonal to defining what to name a certain crime.

 

[jdstorm]

Heres a quick question to ask yourself.

Is It Rape?
Did you recieve express consent to do the sexual act you just completed?

Yes. Not Rape
NO. RAPE.

This is a pretty cut and dry situation. A human being is being penetrated without giving their explicit consent to the manner in which that happens. Its RAPE.

 

[Vicetrailia]

To be honest though this isn't new.

 

[mentallyinept]

okay so all you dime store fuckbaskets here's the thing

if someone doesn't consent to something, it's rape

if you think something might be rape, it is rape

if you have to ask yourself "is there the slightest hint they'd say no to what i'm about to do", it's rape

just because a woman has agreed to have sex that night does not mean you're free to whatever you want sexually to her "because she wanted sex already".

if a someone says they want sex but you need to use a condom, use the condom. sneaking the condom off is rape. they consented to condomed sex, not condomless sex.

if someone says they only want to make out, and you jam your fingers into their genitals because you want to "take control", you just raped them.

if a husband makes a wife have sex with them simply because they are married, it's rape. agreeing to marriage isn't agreeing to unlimited sex access. in fact, it has a specific term for the glade sniffers out there, marital rape.


okay, if you're gonna be pulling out edge cases, so here we go

if she says she wants a threesome with you and another guy, and you sneak in another guy into the room and have him have sex with her because you think it's funny, it's rape. Just because they consented to sex, consented to sex with multiple men, they did not consent to having sex with whatever multiple men you decided to change it to without their knowledge

so repeating again, get it through your heads

read it five times

sex and/or intimate touching without consent is rape.

consenting to sex and then having your consented-to-parameters changed is rape.

people can consent to narrowed parameters for how they want to do sex. Just because someone likes orgasms does not mean they will accept any orgasm forced upon them.

you can also orgasm while being raped. it's not something you can control.

consent can be withdrawn at any moment, time, by anyone, for any reason, and if you continue past it's rape. if you're balls deep inside her and about to explode and she says she's done, you pull out. "i just need to finish real quick" and keeping going is rape. Because the consent was withdrawn. This happens even in long relationships. It doesn't matter how much food you've given, money given, how many years together, you are at no time ever for a single god damn tick tock of the motherfucking grandfather clock of universal time ever entitled to access to another person's body for any reason what so ever.

no, "am i a rapist then if the condom broke by accident" replies,because that's not rape, that's an accident.

"do i need to ask her for consent for every little thing" affirmative consent is an awesome thing to practice. If you feel it's a burden to obtain consent, then stop having sex with other people because you're a god damn creep. Consent isn't always verbal.if you're heavy kissing in bed and you go "you want some of this d, babe?" and they nod yes, congrats you obtained consent. it isn't a goddamn field trip permission slip process like some people think it is. if you don't ask because you think they might say no or don't want to do it, you are on the highway to being a rapist, you chucklefuckasaurus rex.

women are already in a unique position of having to trust someone on average twice their size and strength when they want sex at a really vulnerable moment both physically and emotionally. and statistically,

hold on for it

most rape is committed by someone they know or love

so people trying to barter maybe-rape chips back and forth like "i dunno about that.. realllly" becaue they're more concerned about getting their fucking penis wet and badge unlocked that they forget there is a PERSON on the other side of this, get fucking consent. don't be a creep. don't be a rapist. all you have to do to not rape is simply not rape someone. it's not even complicated.


and goddamn every single time with the replies it's "but what if this woman does this" like you're trying to both sides this shit,

1) YOU NEVER SHOW UP IN MALE VICTIMS OF RAPES THREADS. IN FACT HALF THE TIME YOU POST THE FUCKING "NIIIIICE" JPG. There are male survivors on GAF that have literally given up participating in those threads because it's a tidal wave of "niiiice" and "he got some". Seriously. You. Never. Show. Up. When. Other. Men. Actually. Need . Supporters. It's all about "those fucking women and their rape card". Seriously just search for threads with rape in the title, ones about women will have a bunch of dudes running in to say women can rape too and pretty much just that line, while male ones are niiiice.jpg, what did she look like, welliwouldhadsexwithmyteachertoo, etc etc you actually almost NEVER EVER see those "women can be rapists too" posts in there. huh. strange. interesting.


if people spent half the time they do trying to categorize rapiness on their rapescale on obtaining consent, the world would be a much better place for everyone. Nobody would lose! NOBODY! LITERALLY NO DOWNSIDES TO OBTAINING AFFIRMATIVE CONSENT, EVER

Your tag should be expanded to include a link to this post.

I'll be saving the permalink to this post and using it in the future.

Well said.

 

[2Smashed4U]

I can see how it sounds like I am being sympathetic to rapists. I hope people don't read what I am saying to mean that. I'll try again to assert this point. I am not trying to be sympathetic to them. My point is more about the role prisons have in our society. I am carrying an assumption here, and maybe that assumption is wrong. I won't argue I know I'm right. But I feel that a rapist in the "pick a target and rape a woman" case is an incurable person who needs to be removed from society and a rapist in the "removed his condom during sex without consent" case is likely a curable person.

Some of this is going to come down to opinions on the role people want prison to have on our society.

dude you have no idea what rape even entails

the distinctions you're trying to make are meaningless

 

[dubq]

So gross..

 

[Gattsu25]

Yeah, I said in an earlier post that I agree that things like STDs and pregnancy are other factors to this. Obviously, if one of those happened, the consequences for that action would be far worse. I actually think that our laws don't do enough to punish those who knowingly transmit an STD to an unknowing partner.

But if no STDs are contracted then what? Even after Chris raped Mandy she's still haunted by him in the form of a health scare where she has to consider if she contracted an STD because some forced themselves onto her in a way that she did not consent to.

But it's all good because the test came back negative right?

Counting down every single day to see if she starts showing signs of pregnancy, worried about how she will have to ensure that her rapist doesn't claim parental rights over a potential child or if she will terminate, day in and day out haunted by this Chris rapist who decided that HE needed the power to decide whether or not the sex she wanted was what she was going to get? HE needed the power over her body in that instant. That HE needed to be at the forefront of her mind whenever she sees another man and wonders if they are going to break her trust like HE did.

But it's all good if that pregnancy test comes back negative, right?

Chris' fucking power trip, and his total and utter disregard of Mandy as a person, is what was important to HIM. HE decided to rob her of choice and HE had non-consensual sex with her. That's. Called. Rape.

Jesus fucking christ dude (and it's so fucking painfully obvious that you are a dude). Did it ever occur to you to think about what a "stealthing" encounter would be like from a victim's point of view? Stop emphatically focusing entirely on the point of view of the rapist and look at this from outside the rapist's eyes.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

I can see how it sounds like I am being sympathetic to rapists. I hope people don't read what I am saying to mean that. I'll try again to assert this point. I am not trying to be sympathetic to them. My point is more about the role prisons have in our society. I am carrying an assumption here, and maybe that assumption is wrong. I won't argue I know I'm right. But I feel that a rapist in the "pick a target and rape a woman" case is an incurable person who needs to be removed from society and a rapist in the "removed his condom during sex without consent" case is likely a curable person.

Some of this is going to come down to opinions on the role people want prison to have on our society.

Why are you more concerned with rapists in prison and unable to rape again? I think you need to broaden your view of rape as it seems very narrow. Victims are more likely to know their rapist. Is a woman whose raped by a "friend" somehow less violated?

 

[Makki]

Edit: Having read more pages, there's definitely stories being shared about rape-like instances, I would rather not come to conclusions since it's a hard topic to voice things out without coming off as a dick.

 

[Psychoward]

My main problem with calling it rape is trying to assign equivalent punishment for it.

Let's say Chris and Mandy make the adult decision to have sex. Mandy tells Chris that she wants him to wear a condom. Chris says okay, but intentionally has unprotected sex with her anyways. Let's say for whatever reason Mandy was unaware that it was unprotected. After the fact, Mandy realizes that Chris didn't put on a condom.


I don't think it would be a good idea to have Chris bear the full weight of rape charges. Is Chris a shitty person? Yes. Should be liable to face legal troubles for his actions? Yes. But it is my opinion that a rape conviction is excessive. A lot of this has to do with how I feel about our legal system in general. I'll admit that my view on this can be flawed. But my feeling is that somebody who goes out and rapes people in the typical instance of rape is somebody who is largely incurable. At that point, it is just best to protect our society from this person. My feeling is that Chris' case may not fall into that. I would like for there to be a lighter sentencing that essentially says "You fucked up bad and you're gonna pay for this, but we're not going to lock you up for half your life over it."

dude

 

[Biggad]

I didn't read through the entire thread: what is the goal in doing this again? Because the girl will know immediatly when you finish in her, so is this just about "well now she needs to get the pill after, haha(?), and I don't like condoms so this is how I'm gonna make it work"?

So STRICTLY from that perspective it doesn't seem as fatal as I innitially thought. And thus I'm wondering about the excitement of it for the lost souls that are usually driven by something "sesnsationally" wrong. In addition to the stealther being at risk of getting ptsds just like the woman he's doing it to is. I'm just confused.

 

[Gattsu25]

If the removal of a contraceptive is considered rape in full context, then in the case of a woman, would lying about being on a contraceptive or if there was a female condom in play also constitute male rape? My issue with defining this repulsive bro-culture practice as rape, even if I feel it should be punished, is that there is an underlying consent to penetration. The "ghosting" issue is more on the basis of dishonesty and deceit and the possible consequences I feel.

Your interest in the issue in the OP of this thread is readily apparent by you not even being able to remember that this thread was about..."ghosting" was it?

Please make a new thread about the rise of women lying about being on contraceptives. No need to turn this thread into a "but what about the people who are harmed by WOMENZ"

 

[SyenceLabb]

Your interest in the issue in the OP of this thread is readily apparent by you not even being able to remember that this thread was about..."ghosting" was it?

Please make a new thread about the rise of women lying about being on contraceptives. No need to turn this thread into a "but what about the people who are harmed by WOMENZ"

It's a valid question though. Any new laws on the books would also undoubtedly have to tackle the legality of a woman lying about being on birth control.

 

[SyenceLabb]

Also I seriously question if this is a growing trend. I need to see more receipts.

 

[Makki]

Your interest in the issue in the OP of this thread is readily apparent by you not even being able to remember that this thread was about..."ghosting" was it?

Please make a new thread about the rise of women lying about being on contraceptives. No need to turn this thread into a "but what about the people who are harmed by WOMENZ"

After a long day at work and reading a few pages, excuse me for making a mistake with the stupid practice terminology. Given that you quoted my text before edit I will clarify, there is an underlying consent to penetration. If the dude removes the condom and is told to stop and he doesnt, there's no gray areas thats rape. If the guy was deceitful in not disclosing the removal, but penetration consent was still in place, I find it difficult to think of as rape rather than dishonesty which should make him liable for any damages from it and jail time depending on the consequences from the act.

 

[GrizzNKev]

Hey two words, the cool thing about being wrong is that you don't have to stay wrong. I was wrong before, and then people told me some shit, and I got un-wrong. Read the posts in this thread, think on it for a bit, and try out being less wrong in the future.

 

[Deepwater]

Just so everyone can refer back to this because it'll obviously get brung up again.

"So women lying about birth control is rape too?"

Birth Control does not prevent against STDs.

Condoms (when used properly) are effective against the transmission of STDs.

Use of condoms is not just a pregnancy risk, but a health risk for both parties in sex.

It is not comparable to lying about birth control. Please stop insinuating it is and think for one damn minute before posting.

 

[Vincent Grayson]

Wow, at some of you. Fucking idiots.

Yes, it's rape.

Sex is a choice or agreement between to people, like any contract. It has provisions. You violate the provisions, you're liable.

Let's break it down for some of you children.

If he/she says "stop" in the middle of sex and you keep going, it's rape. Duh.

If he/she says "sure, if you use a condom," then you were only given consent to sex on the provision that a condom is worn. If one is not worn, they are not consenting. JFC. If you keep going knowing full well you're breaking the agreement, knowing full well your partner would have told you to stop had they known what you were doing, It's rape. Not all rape is violent. Get over yourselves.

First, don't be a dick.

If it's "all rape", then what is the difference between rape and sexual assault? And are we talking about legal definitions, or social ones?

Don't act like people here are saying any part of this is okay. We're quibbling over definitions.

Just so everyone can refer back to this because it'll obviously get brung up again.

"So women lying about birth control is rape too?"

Birth Control does not prevent against STDs.

Condoms (when used properly) are effective against the transmitting of STDs.

Use of condoms is not just a pregnancy risk, but a health risk for both parties in sex.

It is not comparable to lying about birth control. Please stop insinuating it is and think for one damn minute before posting.

It is comparable when the initial premise was "sex is a contract, if you lie/change the terms without reaffirming consent, it's rape." I agree, they are two very different deceptive behaviors, and both are not okay. I don't think they are equivalent, but both very much fit the definition of falsely acting against the terms of consent offered. If that is how we define rape, then yes, lying about using BC would in fact be rape. If you read that sentence and think "Well that's obviously not rape", then we need to revisit the definition being offered.

 

[CarpeDeezNutz]

Is this some alt right, red pill 4chan shit? This a really weird thing to want to do.

 

[Gattsu25]

After a long day at work and reading a few pages, excuse me for making a mistake with the stupid practice terminology. Given that you quoted my text before edit I will clarify, there is an underlying consent to penetration. If the dude removes the condom and is told to stop and he doesnt, there's no gray areas thats rape. If the guy was deceitful in not disclosing the removal, but penetration consent was still in place, I find it difficult to think of as rape rather than dishonesty which should make him liable for any damages from it and jail time depending on the consequences from the act.

Just to be clear, the consent in that case would have been for penetration using a condom.

 

[ModBot]

This thread has seemingly gone off the rails, because some people feel the need to defend this shit behaviour.