Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    23 Nov '11
    Moves
    23086
    12 Mar '17 20:15
    For those who think women sometimes "ask for it."

    https://www.facebook.com/bbccomedy/videos/10154353535796778/
  2. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    12 Mar '17 21:492 edits
    Who could possibly think that some women 'ask for it' (to be raped)

    "Let me see.
    A couple goes out and gets drunk. She passes out and the boyfriend has sex with her anyhow.
    Sounds like something that might happen and most people would not consider rape."
    --Eladar
  3. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    65511
    12 Mar '17 21:53
    Originally posted by Phranny
    For those who think women sometimes "ask for it."

    https://www.facebook.com/bbccomedy/videos/10154353535796778/
    Are you a male Phranny? Strap on a Rolex and wander the back streets of Manila late at night.
  4. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    12 Mar '17 21:55
    Quackquack has been condemned as a 'rape apologist' by writers such as KazetNagorra and Zahlanzi.

    Let's review some of the evidence that Quackquack keeps lying about, preferring to deny its existence:
    Here are some posts by Quackquack and some of his critics in the thread (created by Sh76),
    "Does Hook-Up Culture Lead to More Rapes?"

    "I have no problem convicting someone of rape if one person says no and the other
    continues against their will. But to me there seems to be a credibility problem -- why
    exactly would you not "kick or scream or really push" if you believed you were being
    raped? To me this is exactly the type of case where you need to examine the actions of
    the women to see if truly did not consent."
    --Quackquack

    "Because it might get you killed?"
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack, replying to his post)

    Quackquack and No1Marauder had a long argument in this thread.
    I shall quote more posts from it later.

    "On this forum we have several rape apologists (if not actual rapists) such as Eladar,
    normbenign and quackquack. Do these people seem to you as subscribers to a "hook-up culture"?"
    --KazetNagorra (to Sh76)

    KazetNagorra condemns Quackquack for being a rape apologist.
    Quackquack often has lied by claiming that only I have condemned him as a rape apologist.

    Here's a post of mine criticizing Quackquack:
    "Quackquack keeps showing his obvious bias. He would be an ideal juror for the accused rapist.

    "She admits to willing entering a physical relationship with the guy."
    --Quackquack

    Does Quackquack believe that every time that a girl lets a man kiss her, she must have
    given her consent to sexual intercourse with him? Is that the 'slippery slope' he likes?

    "No one heard her verbally resist..."
    --Quackquack

    Every rape must take place with potential witnesses nearby (sarcasm intended).

    "...because she wasn't upset enough to verbally resist."
    --Quackquack

    Actually, the girl has testified that she was very upset and that she *did* 'verbally resist.
    But Quackquack apparently prefers to believe that she must have lied under oath.
    That shows Quackquack's prejudice.

    The girl has testified that *she said 'no' three times*. Her saying 'no' *only once* should
    be enough to get him to stop. She should *not* have to SCREAM 'NO!' one hundred times
    or wave her arms or perform cartwheels in order to draw his attention to 'NO MEANS NO'.
    Exactly what part of 'No' does Quackquack find so hard to comprehend or accept?

    A juror should acquit the accused rapist only if the juror believes that he did not hear her say 'no'.
    Once he heard 'no', he should have stopped immediately. If he had any doubt about what
    he heard, then he should have stopped and asked her, "Are you saying 'no' to sex with me?"
    --Duchess64
  5. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    12 Mar '17 21:561 edit
    Here's more of the argument between Quackquack and No1Marauder
    in the thread "Does Hook-up Culture Lead to More Rapes?".

    "If there is no verbal threat and no no physical threat and no weapon why would it be
    reasonable for her to believe she would be killed? If she would not yell or scream and
    would not physically struggle what support is there for her claim that she did not consent?"
    --Quackquack (to No1Marauder)

    "What century is this? Without prejudging this particular case, the idea that a woman
    has to physically resist a rape and risk severe physical harm hasn't been part of the law
    for decades. A 15 year old girl tells a 19 year old man to "stop" and he doesn't while
    using physical force is sufficient for a rape conviction.
    Some of the things written on this forum are simply beyond belief."
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack)

    Now Quackquack lies as usual, putting words into my mouth, attacking an absurd 'strawman":
    "So you [Duchess64] would convict a guy of rape without any corroborating evidence,
    without even a claim of weapon or physical threat and without even a claim that the now
    alleged victim was upset enough at the time to even yell and scream? If the answer is
    yes, then please explain why you believe you'd be a fair juror."
    --Quackquack (to Duchess64)

    No1Marauder (who's no friend of mine) criticizes Quackquack's post to me:
    "Are you [Quackquack] insane?
    There is no necessity of a weapon or a stated physical threat to support a rape
    conviction. A person, like you, who thinks there is, would be a totally unfit juror not
    someone who accepts the law."
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack)

    "It is the 21st century where fifteen year olds consent to sex all the time and if she won't
    resist physically or even claim to yell or scream I can't say beyond a reasonable doubt
    that she did not consent."
    --Quackquack (to No1Marauder. replying to his earlier post)

    "Then you are applying a legally incorrect standard. A rape victim is NOT required
    to A) Physically resist or B) Scream."
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack)

    Then Quackquack boasts about his self-evident superior legal knowledges.
    "I understand the law and I understand the facts are in dispute.
    Would you convict the guy of rape if he denied she had said no and she had no other
    evidence then her testimony to support her claim?"
    --Quackquack (to No1Marauder)

    "I'd have to see the testimony. Trials often are decided by evaluations of witness
    credibility. And there may be "other evidence" besides physical evidence at the scene."
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack)

    Then the right-wing white American Quackquack attacks 'liberals'.
    "I hope you have something concrete in mind for your "other" evidence category. But
    it's sounds a lot like what liberals normally complain about: deciding trials because the
    white girl cries and alleged victim isn't from the popular group (in other cases
    unemployed, minority or other irrelevant characteristic)."
    --Quackquack (to No1Marauder)

    "Concrete is what your head seems to be made of.
    Trying to play a reverse race card is a pathetically phony tactic here."
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack)

    "This is the flimsiest case I've ever seen. They consented to meet. She wasn't
    threatened verbally or physically. She did not claim to resist or even yell.
    NOTHING at all supports her claim she said no."
    --Quackquack (to No1Marauder)

    "Amazing."
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack)

    "The "cultural norm" QQ [Quackquack] apparently adheres to requires a woman to
    scream and/or physically resist if she doesn't want to have sex with you.
    That's rather remarkable to me; I always thought they could just say "no" (they do a
    LOT in my experience)."
    --No1Marauder (to Normbenign about Quackquack)

    "How do you know she said no? She would not even claim she was upset enough to
    scream or physically resist."
    --Quackquack (to No1Marauder)

    "I don't KNOW, but she says she did. That's a question of credibility to be resolved by the jury.
    Your idea that a woman MUST scream or physically resist is legally wrong. And rather morally disgusting."
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack)
  6. Subscriberdivegeester
    Leave Means Leave
    Voting not marching!
    Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    88783
    12 Mar '17 21:59
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Here's more of the argument between Quackquack and No1Marauder
    in the thread "Does Hook-up Culture Lead to More Rapes?".

    "If there is no verbal threat and no no physical threat and no weapon why would it be
    reasonable for her to believe she would be killed? If she would not yell or scream and
    would not physically struggle what support is there fo ...[text shortened]... sically resist is legally wrong. And rather morally disgusting."
    --No1Marauder (to Quackquack)
    Why are you seemingly obsessed with rape?
  7. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    12 Mar '17 22:081 edit
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Why are you seemingly obsessed with rape?
    Phranny created this thread, which she named 'Rape', about "those who think women sometimes "ask for it."
    Does Divegeester object to Phranny making rape and rape apologists the subject of discussion?
    If I recall correctly, Divegeester was ready to discuss marital rape with Robbie Carrobie.

    "On this forum we have several rape apologists (if not actual rapists) such as Eladar,
    normbenign and quackquack. Do these people seem to you as subscribers to a "hook-up culture"?"
    --KazetNagorra (to Sh76)

    Given that these rape apologists (though Normbenign has stopped posting at RHP) and
    others have long records of lying about their rape apologist posts, does Divegeester
    object to the posting (again) of evidence about their rape apologist attitudes?
    Would Divegeester accept Robbie Carrobie's word, for instance, that he never has condoned marital rape?
  8. Subscriberdivegeester
    Leave Means Leave
    Voting not marching!
    Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    88783
    12 Mar '17 22:11
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Phranny created this thread, which she named 'Rape', about "those who think women sometimes "ask for it."
    Does Divegeester object to Phranny making rape and rape apologists the subject of discussion?
    If I recall correctly, Divegeester was ready to discuss marital rape with Robbie Carrobie.

    "On this forum we have several rape apologists (if not actual ...[text shortened]... ivegeester accept Robbie Carrobie's word, for instance, that he never has condoned marital rape?
    No, I don't at all.
  9. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    12 Mar '17 23:04
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Who could possibly think that some women 'ask for it' (to be raped)

    "Let me see.
    A couple goes out and gets drunk. She passes out and the boyfriend has sex with her anyhow.
    Sounds like something that might happen and most people would not consider rape."
    --Eladar
    You mean the kind of rape where the guy doesn't go to prison.

    Why? Because the judge has a brain.
  10. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    12 Mar '17 23:17
    Originally posted by Phranny
    For those who think women sometimes "ask for it."

    https://www.facebook.com/bbccomedy/videos/10154353535796778/
    If you are talking about actual rape, then you need to go to a Sharia compliant forum to post this.
  11. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    12 Mar '17 23:391 edit
    Originally posted by Eladar
    If you are talking about actual rape, then you need to go to a Sharia compliant forum to post this.
    The racist troll Eladar likes to act as though women should be afraid of only Muslim or non-white men as potential rapists.

    Derry McCann, a white man, was convicted (at age 17) of raping a woman (age 30).
    He never expressed remorse. After nine years in prison, he convinced a parole board
    that he was not dangerous. Hours before he married his pregnant fiancee, he stalked and
    raped (three times in two hours) another woman (age 24) in a crime similar to his earlier one.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4302820/Failures-justice-freed-evil-man-rape-AGAIN.html

    "Because in between leaving the pub and getting married, he perpetrated the most
    brutal of crimes — the multiple rape of a 24-year-old woman.
    McCann targeted the university graduate as she walked back from an art show,
    dragging her into Victoria park and subjecting her to a two-hour attack. He then went home."

    "That McCann could commit such a crime, then go on to his own wedding is shocking
    enough. But what is more shocking still is that he was free to carry out that barbaric
    attack in the first place.

    Because in 2006, McCann, then 17, was convicted of another rape. The circumstances
    of that attack were almost identical to the one in January — in how it was carried out
    and the violence inflicted on the victim. So horrified was the trial judge, Judge Lindsay
    Burn, at the time that he jailed McCann for life."

    "...in May 2006, McCann, then 17, pounced on a 30-year-old woman as she walked in nearby Mile End Park."

    "McCann, who was wearing an electronic tag having been convicted of an earlier burglary,
    told his accomplice to leave them, saying: ‘I’m gonna have some fun with this one.’
    His victim said: ‘I started pleading with this guy, he had his arms round me. I was
    wriggling, trying to get away, but he was a lot stronger than me. He was on top of me.
    ‘He was holding my neck. He gestured to his backpack and asked me: “Have you ever
    been knifed in the neck? You’re going to be knifed in the neck if you don’t shut up.” ’

    The victim said he pulled her screaming towards the pond near tall weeds and began undressing her.
    ‘I remember seeing on Crimewatch, if someone’s being violently attacked it’s better to
    kind of co-operate and be a bit passive,’ she said. ‘I couldn’t beat him off, so didn’t have a choice.
    ‘I decided to stop screaming so much. He leaned towards me. He tried to kiss me, and I
    remember him looking at me. He was disgusting. Then he bit my cheek.’

    McCann then inflicted a series of sexual assaults on the woman before taunting her.
    She said: ‘He told me: “You’re gorgeous, I’m not letting you go, you’re my girlfriend now.
    I’m going to chain you up in my house, and you’re going to be my girlfriend — there’s
    already another girl there waiting.’ The sex attack continued as he told her: ‘Make
    noises like you’re enjoying it.’ He then lay beside her and stroked her hair before saying
    he wanted her to have his baby.

    Then he challenged her to say what he’d done. When she replied: ‘You’ve raped me,’
    he asked what she was going to do about it. She replied: ‘I’m going to go home and I’m
    going to cry and forget it ever happened.’ McCann suddenly announced: ‘I’m going to
    let you go,’ and walked off. Soon after, the woman contacted police, telling them: ‘I don’t
    want him to get anyone else.’ Linked to the scene by DNA, McCann tried to claim the
    sex had been consensual."
  12. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    The Axe man
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    92185
    12 Mar '17 23:40
    Originally posted by Eladar
    You mean the kind of rape where the guy doesn't go to prison.

    Why? Because the judge has a brain.
    How many types of rape are there?

    It's either rape or it isn't,no?
  13. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    13 Mar '17 00:091 edit
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    How many types of rape are there?

    It's either rape or it isn't,no?
    Oh no, there are many forms of rape.

    You have the rape where a guy or group of men force themselves on a woman while she screams.

    You have the kind of rape where a woman is drunk, consents but is too drunk to consent.

    There is the rape when a female does not resist and seems to be receptive. But the girl was never asked verbally so claims she was raped.

    There are lots of kinds of rape.
  14. Joined
    23 Nov '11
    Moves
    23086
    13 Mar '17 01:53
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Who could possibly think that some women 'ask for it' (to be raped)

    "Let me see.
    A couple goes out and gets drunk. She passes out and the boyfriend has sex with her anyhow.
    Sounds like something that might happen and most people would not consider rape."
    --Eladar
    WHAT???? MOST PEOPLE WOULD NOT CONSIDER RAPING AN UNCONSCIOUS PERSON A CRIME? Well then if a man falls down drunk at a party and people steal his watch and wallet, most people would not call it theft.
  15. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    13 Mar '17 02:04
    Originally posted by Phranny
    WHAT???? MOST PEOPLE WOULD NOT CONSIDER RAPING AN UNCONSCIOUS PERSON A CRIME? Well then if a man falls down drunk at a party and people steal his watch and wallet, most people would not call it theft.
    If it was his drunk girlfriend or drunk wife?

    No
Back to Top