No. I was asking for the quote where he denied rape.
You've yet to post a quote that says that.
Then what is the quote I posted saying?
No. I was asking for the quote where he denied rape.
You've yet to post a quote that says that.
Then what is the quote I posted saying?
Then there was the one where he said she was a willing participant (taking off her own clothes) but you had to alter that quote and add "and she said no" to it, to alter its meaning. Since he never said that part.
Why would there be any discussion of rape if she consented?
If a girl takes her top off and then tells me no, I’m not a rapist. So I will stop.
Exactly. Read that again. He's saying there is no rape if she's consenting. Joining in. Willing participant.
That doesn't equate to rape. That is what he said. If she's willing, then it's not rape. But you knew that.
If his quote was so bad, you wouldn't have had to LIE and add "and she said no" to it later to try and make it sound bad.
But taking off your clothes isn’t consent.
He’s saying that a girl who takes off her clothes consented. She then cannotclaim rape because it was consensual
.
Taking off your own clothes certainly implies consent. Hence the willingly joining in part.
He's saying the girl who consents shouldn't get an abortion, because it wasn't rape.
But you know this. That's why you had to LIE, and change his quote to make it seem different.
You're so focused on trying to accuse someone of lying, you don't even understand what's being said. You've literally spent all day arguing someone can't be raped if they take their clothes off.
I'm not arguing that at all. That's just more made up lies by you.
Like you had to LIE and alter his quote to make it mean what you want.
All day, lie after lie so you can call some anonymous poster that you've never met a supporter of rape. Talk about vile and disgusting.
What a pathetic way to get your jollies.
Interesting, notice how you quit responding to the relevant stuff again. Is it because you now understand that taking off your clothes isn't consent?
And that it really isn't cool to spend all day telling someone who was raped that they couldn't have been raped because they took their clothes off?
This is one of those times it's better to admit you were wrong than to knowingly defend "slut shaming"
You'd have to come up with something relevant for me to respond to.
Can you post a link to where i told a rape victim she wasn't raped? Or addresssd a rape victim at all? Because you keep making up these lies, and then never back them up.
You would think after sleeping on it, you would want to be a decent human being.
But I guess not.
Like I stated, you are obviously not qualified to even comment any more. Why on earth would a girl take her clothes off in front of a man? TAKING YOUR CLOTHES OFF IS CONSENT. Go ask a judge how he sees it? I do not know where you were raised to think otherwise. That is what you would understand if you had ever raised a girl. I pray you never have to raise one.But it isn't consent is it? A girl can take off her clothes and not want to have sexual intercourse with a person. Correct?
No, he's saying that a girl who takes off her clothes consented. But we know taking your clothes off isn't actual consent, right?
It's vile and disgusting.
I'm not the one needing to crawl out of the gutter. You know that, but it's funny how desperately you'll cling to your lies rather than just admit you made a mistake.
Like I stated, you are obviously not qualified to even comment any more. Why on earth would a girl take her clothes off in front of a man? TAKING YOUR CLOTHES OFF IS CONSENT. Go ask a judge how he sees it? I do not know where you were raised to think otherwise. That is what you would understand if you had ever raised a girl. I pray you never have to raise one.
I've already proven my point. That's why you can't address the substance. You keep saying it doesn't exist.
You're the one lying to yourself and lying to others.
You have to provide something of substance. So far you e provided a quote about misreading the word "more", and then altered another quote.
Maybe you just don't understand it, but that's not substance.
TAKING YOUR CLOTHES OFF IS CONSENT.
Like I stated, you are obviously not qualified to even comment any more. Why on earth would a girl take her clothes off in front of a man? TAKING YOUR CLOTHES OFF IS CONSENT. Go ask a judge how he sees it? I do not know where you were raised to think otherwise. That is what you would understand if you had ever raised a girl. I pray you never have to raise one.
Like I stated, you are obviously not qualified to even comment any more. Why on earth would a girl take her clothes off in front of a man? TAKING YOUR CLOTHES OFF IS CONSENT. Go ask a judge how he sees it? I do not know where you were raised to think otherwise. That is what you would understand if you had ever raised a girl. I pray you never have to raise one.
He even used all caps and bold to highlight his hatred of women.
TAKING YOUR CLOTHES OFF IS CONSENT. Go ask a judge how he sees it? I do not know where you were raised to think otherwise. That is what you would understand if you had ever raised a girl. I pray you never have to raise one.
You guys are delving into some pretty far-fetched hypotheticals with this one. '
However, if a woman takes her clothes off and then expressly indicates she doesn't want to proceed, that's her right.
Who knows what her background is and what's she's been through previously? Maybe she thought she was ready but she isn't?
An analogy might be -- Imagine roughhousing with one of your buddies and it gets a little too rough and you say "that's it" and he then proceeds to throw a punch a knock you out. That's assault.
As far interpretation from a court of law, it would depend whether the party who wanted the action to stop was clear about that.
She'll likely say she was crystal clear. He'll probably adamantly deny it.
So it ultimately turns into a "He said - She said" case and it will be the nuisances of the situation judge/jury will use to in quest for their decision.
I have to give you credit for being reasonable on this one. It gives more credibility that your other stances are in good faith.
This discussion has had the opposite reaction for @Lurker123.
I'd like to say you lost credibility in this discussion. But you had none at the beginning.
I have to give you credit for being reasonable on this one. It gives more credibility that your other stances are in good faith.
This discussion has had the opposite reaction for @Lurker123.
The challenge with situations like this is that there's typically alcohol and/or drugs involved which muddies up what actually happened and/or was expressed.
It is not uncommon for women to have 'buyer's remorse" once they sober up and attempt to assuage their guilt through legal action at the guy's expense.
Says the guy still trying to support discrediting rape victims.
Can you post a link to that supposed statement from me?
Or is this just you making up sh!t again?
No one is making up anything.
Except when you lied to change his quote, because his original quote was a bit to benign for you.
When did I change his quote?
By adding the scenario where the victim says no?
No, he clearly said that if someone takes off their clothes they can't claim rape.Yes, you changed his quote to add that she changes her mind. That is totallly changing the scenario, and he never included that, you did.
No, he clearly said that if someone takes off their clothes they can't claim rape.
If you couldn't properly interpret that from his comment, you have a reading comprehension deficiency.
Well, you've admitted you changed his quote.
You've also admitted it changed the scenario.
That's more then I ever thought I could get out of you.
Proceed with your lies, I will continue to laugh.
Blaming rape victims for being raped isn't anything to laugh about it.
It's a shame you don't have any integrity.
Good Lord.
I think we can all agree on the following:
Rape is bad.
Just because a woman takes off her shirt, doesn't give anyone permission to do anything in and of itself. She very well still might say "no" and that's fine and that should end it.
The problem is that @Lurker123 liked your post but has spent two days arguing against it.