Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Given that I have been personally mocked by girls for my refusal to commit rape, it's probably fair to say that human sexuality is more complicated than the general public's ability to understand it. Que sara.

I have to say, these lads really need to keep their yaps shut on these kinda topics, surely they must be able to see that its hurting their cause?

Its like my boss nominating me, one of the most bigoted and intolerant people in his company to be the Anglo-Afghan liaison officer in charge of meeting with the local mayor and the TV cameras!

You know.. some people are better than others at talking to the press, doesn't it make sense to tell the more...er... vehement in their belief chaps to wind it in for a little while?

I mean, you can hold your beliefs, but you don't have to constantly bark on about them if its going to cost you!

 Testify wrote:
Given that I have been personally mocked by girls for my refusal to commit rape, it's probably fair to say that human sexuality is more complicated than the general public's ability to understand it. Que sara.

Warning: contains swearing.

Is there really a link to the University of Man in here trying to back up some sort of point?

 mattyrm wrote:
I have to say, these lads really need to keep their yaps shut on these kinda topics, surely they must be able to see that its hurting their cause?

Its like my boss nominating me, one of the most bigoted and intolerant people in his company to be the Anglo-Afghan liaison officer in charge of meeting with the local mayor and the TV cameras!

You know.. some people are better than others at talking to the press, doesn't it make sense to tell the more...er... vehement in their belief chaps to wind it in for a little while?

I mean, you can hold your beliefs, but you don't have to constantly bark on about them if its going to cost you!

I'd pay good money to have you placed as the Anglo-Afghan Liaison officer for your unit. Especially if we can get it all on film. YEARS of entertainment.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Given that I have been personally mocked by girls for my refusal to commit rape, it's probably fair to say that human sexuality is more complicated than the general public's ability to understand it. Que sara.

Warning: contains swearing.

Louis CK's pretty freaking awesome.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Given that I have been personally mocked by girls for my refusal to commit rape, it's probably fair to say that human sexuality is more complicated than the general public's ability to understand it. Que sara.

Warning: contains swearing.

Yeah. That attitude is quite common in women.

My "friend" is still massively attracted to her ex who raped her.

Edited by Manchu.

 Testify wrote:
it's probably fair to say that human sexuality is more complicated than the general public's ability to understand it

So what's the solution? Only talk about these issues in furtive, low-voices with the blinds drawn? Seems a bit Victorian.

 Manchu wrote:
I've been mulling this one over some more. In-context, the phrase "some girls rape easy" strikes a deeply grim note. It's suitable for a serious conversation between a dad and a son who's likely to soon be sexually active for the first time. From a father's point of view, his son needs to know that the world is definitely not what it ought to be. Are you Dakkanauts seriously never going to make a similar point to your sons? The real question is why can't we say this good, necessary advice in public? Human beings, not just girls and women, do change their minds about things that have already happened. Is it misandric for a parent to tell their daughter "some boys will want to rape you"? Girls need to hear that, obviously. It's true. And I can say that on TV.

This was my take on it.

 Manchu wrote:

 Testify wrote:
it's probably fair to say that human sexuality is more complicated than the general public's ability to understand it

So what's the solution? Only talk about these issues in furtive, low-voices with the blinds drawn? Seems a bit Victorian.

I'm not going to rant on about "femonazis" controlling the media, since it's bollocks.

But I'd say that culturally the link between sex and violence is not acknowledged. Certainly the idea of women being naturally submissive and appreciative of violence is considered "taboo" in modern media, less so in the real world. And yes I am aware that some men also enjoy such things before I get flamed.

 Testify wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Given that I have been personally mocked by girls for my refusal to commit rape, it's probably fair to say that human sexuality is more complicated than the general public's ability to understand it. Que sara.

Warning: contains swearing.

Yeah. That attitude is quite common in women.

My "friend" is still massively attracted to her ex who raped her. Women are fethed up

I really doubt that I don't think many women enjoy rape.

 Cheesecat wrote:

I really doubt that I don't think many women enjoy rape.

So do I. Thankfully, that's not what I said.

But miss-understandings like that are what makes this topic so difficult to talk about. It's all black and white, no shades of grey.

 Testify wrote:
Certainly the idea of women being naturally submissive and appreciative of violence is considered "taboo" in modern media, less so in the real world.

Wait, is that your answer to my question about why it's less okay to publicly tell boys that girls might falsely accuse them of rape than it is to tell girls that boys might want to rape them?

 Manchu wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Certainly the idea of women being naturally submissive and appreciative of violence is considered "taboo" in modern media, less so in the real world.

Wait, is that your answer to my question about why it's less okay to publicly tell boys that girls might falsely accuse them of rape than it is to tell girls that boys might want to rape them?

No. Only neanderthals think that, it is obvious to most decent people that the damage caused by being raped is far worse than the damage caused by a false accusation, as well as being far more likely.

But I'd regard that as the mother's duty anyway. I don't think I could look into the eyes of a child and tell her that one day someone might rape her...

 Manchu wrote:
I've been mulling this one over some more. In-context, the phrase "some girls rape easy" strikes a deeply grim note. It's suitable for a serious conversation between a dad and a son who's likely to soon be sexually active for the first time. From a father's point of view, his son needs to know that the world is definitely not what it ought to be. Are you Dakkanauts seriously never going to make a similar point to your sons? The real question is why can't we say this good, necessary advice in public? Human beings, not just girls and women, do change their minds about things that have already happened. Is it misandric for a parent to tell their daughter "some boys will want to rape you"? Girls need to hear that, obviously. It's true. And I can say that on TV.

I most certainly would not. The incidence of this is extremely rare. Despite what "Men's Rights" nutters might want to believe, there aren't hordes women out there just waiting for you to have sex with them so they can pull the surprise presto-chango you're a rapist routine. I may well as well tell him to "Wear a helmet, meteorite might hit you" it's beyond silly. The majority of these cases that some people try to frame as "Changed her mind later" really are legitimate cases where either consent was withdrawn at some point in the process, or never really given in the first place and he kept going in spite of it. If ever have children I'm going to tell them all, son or daughter the exact same thing on this subject:

Only have sex when you feel comfortable doing so, and only have sex with partner who is giving clear, informed and active consent while a capable state of mind.

I certainly do not have to tell my daughter to be afraid of rape, that's for sure. Our culture does that every day. We bombard women with the threat of rape constantly, from all directions. There isn't a woman alive in america today who isn't only aware of rape, but is also aware of all the things she can supposedly do to invite it upon myself. If I'm going to tell her *Anything specific* it's me

*There is nothing she could do deserve harm.
*Nothing anyone does lessens her value as a human being, or changes my feelings.
*If she ever feels overwhelmed, afraid or threatened please come to me, I am on your side.

I'd probably tell my son the same thing too.

 Chongara wrote:

I most certainly would not. The incidence of this is extremely rare. Despite what "Men's Rights" nutters might want to believe, there aren't hordes women out there just waiting for you to have sex with them so they can pull the surprise presto-chango you're a rapist routine.

I believe the better approach would be to inform him that what constitutes "jail bait" is no longer 17.

I'm also somewhat curious as to how Wisconsin state law would handle a sexual relationship between two 15 year old girls, given that neither of them can grant consent; at least assuming the standards for consent vary according to sex (which is not unheard of).

@Testify: I'm struggling to understand who you're labeling neanderthals.

@Chongara: You seem to believe there are hordes of men who want to rape women. But the idea that women might use sexual contact in a vindicative, potentially life-destorying way is unthinkable? It reminds me of how Queen Victoria illegalized gay sex but refused to believe there was a such a thing as a lesbian.

 Manchu wrote:
@Testify: I'm struggling to understand who you're labeling neanderthals.

The sort of people who write vitriolic articles in the Daily Mail attacking women who falsely accuse of rape. Yes it's horrible, but it's also very rare.

Another poster further up compared them to the "wear a tin hat to avoid lightening" loonies.

I wouldn't want to instill into any son of mine the idea that women generally were out to "get him" but then I do figure I'd want to instill that idea into my daughter regarding men. Something seems wrong here, and I don't think it's "the patriarchy." I'm not talking from a conscious ideology; just chatting as we go. So for example, Chongara's prospective advice to his children sounds reasonable but I don't think it covers the real issue, which is what is clear, informed, and active consent "on the ground"? How is a sexually inexperienced teenager supposed to know that when its difficult to determine in a court of law?

I think a lot more teenage girls have "forced" sexual experiences than society is prepared to accept. That's how some girls learn, anyway.

It's the quotation marks around "forced" that constitute the very subject at issue.

One of the few context in which saying ''I rape hard'' is acceptable, and actually preferable.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:
One of the few context in which saying ''I rape hard'' is acceptable, and actually preferable.

I also think the issue here is that the word "rape" is used too liberally that it's lost some of its meaning.

But that's just me.

 Manchu wrote:


@Chongara: You seem to believe there are hordes of men who want to rape women. But the idea that womenght use sexual contact in a vindicative, potentially life-destorying way is unthinkable? It reminds me of how Queen Victoria illegalized gay sex but refused to believe there was a such a thing as a lesbian.

No. I don't think I ever said there are hordes of men out there waiting to rape. I think our culture certainly gives that perception, that a woman is in danger of rape at all times everywhere especially if she's doing or wearing anything fun. That means nobody has to (or should), go out of way to tell a woman or girl "You might get raped" she already knows this, there is no way for her to not know this.

My current understanding is that the portion of the male population that commits rape, or some other predatory sexual attack is about 6%. While that certainly means there is a non-trivial number of predators, the overwhelming majority of men are clearly not rapists.

None of this changes the fact that the presto-chango bs is rare. While I guess it's not "unthinkable", it's not anything I'd give consideration as a real threat in my or my son's life. Rape already goes under reported, and those reports are frequently weakly pursued. I'd need to see some strong evidence to convince me that some meaningful number of the few rape cases that actually come to light are just some kind of petty revenge/cover up on the part of the victim.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:
One of the few context in which saying ''I rape hard'' is acceptable, and actually preferable.

I believe that depends on relevant collection of sex toys.

 Chongara wrote:
While I guess it's not "unthinkable", it's not anything I'd give consideration as a real threat in my or my son's life.

Just like rape, I think the perceived seriousness of the consequences of being accused of rape rather than the probability of its occurrence should drive a parent's concern. Along with being called a racist or a pedophile, being called a rapist is basically the worst thing that can be said of someone in the contemporary West. Certainly, no sexual encounter is worth that sobriquet.

 Manchu wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
While I guess it's not "unthinkable", it's not anything I'd give consideration as a real threat in my or my son's life.

Just like rape, I think the perceived seriousness of the consequences of being accused of rape rather than the probability of its occurrence should drive a parent's concern. Along with being called a racist or a pedophile, being called a rapist is basically the worst thing that can be said of someone in the contemporary West. Certainly, no sexual encounter is worth that sobriquet.

My point is the chances of you being called a the risk of falsely being labeled rapist is very slim. It might be serious but it's not likely enough to be any sort of driving concern. Getting mauled by tiger is pretty damn serious, but it's not like I'm going to tell someone to avoid going to the Zoo because "One of the workers might leave the tiger enclosure open, just to see what will happen". You're counting on something that while certainly possible, isn't remotely close to likely.

The best way to avoid being accused of rape is to not rape, and not raping is pretty damn easy.

 Chongara wrote:

The best way to avoid being accused of rape is to not rape, and not raping is pretty damn easy.

I think that's what part of what's being discussed. Unless you demand written, signed consent before you have sex with someone, there is a grey area.

 Testify wrote:

 Chongara wrote:

The best way to avoid being accused of rape is to not rape, and not raping is pretty damn easy.

I think that's what part of what's being discussed. Unless you demand written, signed consent before you have sex with someone, there is a grey area.

Written consent is no more or less vulnerable to invalidation by things like such coercion, intoxication or force than any other form of granting consent. This is just a silly statement.

 Chongara wrote:

 Testify wrote:

 Chongara wrote:

The best way to avoid being accused of rape is to not rape, and not raping is pretty damn easy.

I think that's what part of what's being discussed. Unless you demand written, signed consent before you have sex with someone, there is a grey area.

Written consent is no more or less vulnerable to invalidation by things like such coercion, intoxication or force than any other form of granting consent. This is just a silly statement.

Beat me to the punch.

Being accused of rape is not really as unlikely as getting hit by a meteor or mauled by a tiger at the zoo. Can you please reign in the rhetoric a bit?

You can dismiss Testify's point that written consent is no less problematic than verbal but how about addressing his point that "not raping is pretty damn easy" might be merely conclusory?