Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    15 Dec '17 14:53
    Originally posted by @mchill
    There are male chastity devices. They come with locks and keys too. It may sound weird, but some marriage counselors that actually suggest these for over aggressive males. Maybe we need more lady key holders. 😉
    tried it...too small:'(
  2. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    Just another day
    tinyurl.com/y3ngvdp2
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    15 Dec '17 17:55
    Originally posted by @indonesia-phil
    I'm not convinced by this women raping men business; without getting too graphic, if a man isn't a willing participant then it kind of doesn't work, does it? Women seduce, but that's different...
    1) Male arousal is not generally under the control of the man
    2) People can be raped by objects
  3. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    15 Dec '17 19:325 edits
    Originally posted by @indonesia-phil to Mott-the-Hoopie
    I'm not convinced by this women raping men business; without getting too graphic, if a man
    isn't a willing participant then it kind of doesn't work, does it? Women seduce, but that's different...
    The misogynistic troll Mott-the-Hoopie's opinions on rape are ignorant (at best) and reprehensible.
    The (racist, sexist) right-wing tabloid 'The Daily Mail' loves to emphasize cases of
    women allegedly raping men or boys and non-white men allegedly raping white women.

    In the interest of factual accuracy, however, I present this article (which should be read carefully):
    https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/the-understudied-female-sexual-predator/503492/

    "The Understudied Female Sexual Predator
    According to new research, sexual victimization by women is more common than gender stereotypes would suggest."
    --Conor Friedersdorf (28 November 2016)

    "As well, “a 2014 study of 284 men and boys in college and high school found that 43 percent
    reported being sexually coerced, with the majority of coercive incidents resulting in unwanted
    sexual intercourse. Of them, 95 percent reported only female perpetrators. The authors
    *defined sexual coercion broadly, including verbal pressure such as nagging and begging,*
    which, the authors acknowledge, increases prevalence dramatically.”

    'Nagging and begging' (by women toward men) was defined as 'sexual coercion' rather than 'seduction'.
    (What did Mrs Robinson do to Benjamin in the film 'The Graduate'? Was it a crime?)

    Evidently, a common difference between these reports of sexual abuse by women upon
    men as compared to those by men upon women is that the women were much less likely
    to commit acts of forcible sexual penetration upon men. Would a man who has not been
    forcibly penetrated feel as violated as a woman who has been forcibly penetrated?

    "And according to the paper, when female abusers are reported, they are less likely to be investigated,
    arrested, or punished compared to male perpetrators, who are regarded as more harmful."
  4. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    15 Dec '17 19:481 edit
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    The misogynistic troll Mott-the-Hoopie's opinions on rape are ignorant (at best) and reprehensible.
    The (racist, sexist) right-wing tabloid 'The Daily Mail' loves to emphasize cases of
    women allegedly raping men or boys and non-white men allegedly raping white women.

    In the interest of factual accuracy, however, I present this article (which should ...[text shortened]... gated,
    arrested, or punished compared to male perpetrators, who are regarded as more harmful."
    I guess I will be a " rape apologist" next. Since you mention my opinion on rape, why don't you inform me what it was? I don't remember giving my opinion!
  5. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    15 Dec '17 20:212 edits
    Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
    I guess I will be a " rape apologist" next. Since you mention my opinion on rape, why don't you inform me what it was?
    I don't remember giving my opinion!
    In fact, Suzianne ALREADY has condemned Mott-the-Hoopie as a rape apologist.

    "Tired, boring argument to minimize rape.
    Welcome [Mott-the-Hoopie] to the men's club of rape apologists already here."
    --Suzianne (to Mott-the-Hoopie, page 2, post 12, "Obama Presidency" )
  6. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    15 Dec '17 21:051 edit
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    In fact, Suzianne ALREADY has condemned Mott-the-Hoopie as a rape apologist.

    "Tired, boring argument to minimize rape.
    Welcome [Mott-the-Hoopie] to the men's club of rape apologists already here."
    --Suzianne (to Mott-the-Hoopie, page 2, post 12, "Obama Presidency" )
    ohmagawd!!! condemned by suziane... LMFAO My life is just useless I tell ya!
  7. Joined
    15 Jun '10
    Moves
    32166
    15 Dec '17 21:11
    Originally posted by @eladar
    So if women are sexually arroused it isn't rape?
    I'm glad you put the question mark there as that isn't what I'm saying at all, as I think you know well enough. My point is actually the opposite, that it's quite possible for a woman to have sexual intercourse without her wanting to (i.e. to be raped). Men have to be aroused, women do not. (One 'r' in aroused, by the way).
  8. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81778
    15 Dec '17 21:18
    Originally posted by @indonesia-phil
    I'm glad you put the question mark there as that isn't what I'm saying at all, as I think you know well enough. My point is actually the opposite, that it's quite possible for a woman to have sexual intercourse without her wanting to (i.e. to be raped). Men have to be aroused, women do not. (One 'r' in aroused, by the way).
    no! men don't have to be aroused to commit rape...
  9. Joined
    15 Jun '10
    Moves
    32166
    15 Dec '17 21:21
    Originally posted by @athousandyoung
    1) Male arousal is not generally under the control of the man
    2) People can be raped by objects
    The point is that the male is aroused, i.e. his hormones have kicked in and it's 'okay, here we go then'. It's fundamentally different.

    I don't really understand your second point in this context.
  10. Joined
    15 Jun '10
    Moves
    32166
    15 Dec '17 21:34
    Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
    no! men don't have to be aroused to commit rape...
    Okay, sorry, I'm being a bit slow here, but I'm getting there. I was defining rape as full, non - consensual sexual intercourse (which is why I wrote sexual intercourse in my post). If we're talking about penetration by an object or anything else, is that not assault as opposed to rape? It's a question; I could be wrong.
  11. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    15 Dec '17 21:424 edits
    Originally posted by @indonesia-phil to Mott-the-Hoopie
    Okay, sorry, I'm being a bit slow here, but I'm getting there. I was defining rape as full, non - consensual sexual intercourse (which is why I wrote sexual intercourse in my post). If we're talking about penetration by an object or anything else, is that not assault as opposed to rape? It's a question; I could be wrong.
    "If we're talking about penetration by an object or anything else, is that not assault as opposed to rape?"
    --IndonesiaPhil

    It depends upon the legal definition (and when it was written).
    Traditionally, rape was defined as a crime by a male against a female, requiring his p*nis
    to penetrate into her vagina, forcibly or without her consent. This definition's becoming obsolete.
    (RHP censors the correct spelling of some anatomical terms.)

    "I was defining rape as full, non - consensual sexual intercourse..."
    --IndonesiaPhil

    Regarding the 'fullness' of non-consensual sexual intercourse, even under the traditional
    definition, the male need not ejaculate into the female for the act to be considered rape.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape#Definitions

    "Until 2012, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) considered rape a crime solely
    committed by men against women. In 2012, they changed their definition from
    "The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will" to "The penetration, no
    matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration
    by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim." The previous definition,
    which had remained unchanged since 1927, was considered outdated and narrow.
    The updated definition includes recognizing any gender of victim and perpetrator and
    that rape with an object can be as traumatic as penile/vaginal rape."
  12. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12497
    16 Dec '17 00:23
    Originally posted by @indonesia-phil
    I'm glad you put the question mark there as that isn't what I'm saying at all, as I think you know well enough. My point is actually the opposite, that it's quite possible for a woman to have sexual intercourse without her wanting to (i.e. to be raped). Men have to be aroused, women do not. (One 'r' in aroused, by the way).
    Thanls for the correction.

    You are being inconsistent. If arousal negates rape then it should apply both ways.
  13. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35902
    16 Dec '17 01:20
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Good luck convincing God of your Christianity when you see him within the next 10 years or so.
    Funny, I was thinking the same thing of you.
  14. Joined
    15 Jun '10
    Moves
    32166
    16 Dec '17 02:24
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    "If we're talking about penetration by an object or anything else, is that not assault as opposed to rape?"
    --IndonesiaPhil

    It depends upon the legal definition (and when it was written).
    Traditionally, rape was defined as a crime by a male against a female, requiring his p*nis
    to penetrate into her vagina, forcibly or without her consent. This de ...[text shortened]... ctim and perpetrator and
    that rape with an object can be as traumatic as penile/vaginal rape."
    Okay, thanks for answering the question.
  15. Joined
    15 Jun '10
    Moves
    32166
    16 Dec '17 02:51
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Thanls for the correction.

    You are being inconsistent. If arousal negates rape then it should apply both ways.
    Okay, here's a thought process in order to try to sort this out. In order for a sexual intercourse to begin, and leaving aside rape by other body parts or inanimate objects, a man may be seduced, coerced, persuaded, nagged and so on into having sex, but he can't be raped, since in order for the act to occur the man must be in a state of arousal.

    A woman on the other hand can be raped, forcibly or otherwise, and whether she becomes aroused or not is beside the point, (as is whether the man reaches climax) it's still rape if she didn't want to do it.

    I know we're in murky waters here, and this is not intended to be a point of view, but rather an attempt to clarify matters. The point is that there is a fundamental difference between male and female sexuality, is there not?
Back to Top