Answering old threads thread

[Arthur Brain]

Lamely.



This was not in the scenario. You made it up.

You can read, right?



That was not in the scenario. You made it up. That Fred does say this makes him an idiot. But you're the liar.

You provide nothing but lame, repetitive and boring lies that add nothing to any discussion.

Fun isn't it?

To you perhaps but meh.

Given the context then yeah, it was answered and that's why I brought it up as Derf doesn't consider it rape if a husband forces himself on his wife and is reduced to these silly scenarios to start with. At least you acknowledge he's an idiot for not recognizing rape for what it is, if not so much for the predictable tropes.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Too late.



English, dude. English.


Why do I have to address what Clete said? You're the liar, not him.

Well duh. Can't undo the vile views expressed by other people Stripe.

It was, what was tripping you up?

Do or don't but don't start prattling on if you're not up to speed with stuff before weighing in.

 

[Derf]

What planet are you on? Clete is always exasperated.

Lol.

 

[Derf]

Maybe you should consult the same dictionary for "violation".

Maybe you can help me find it.

 

[ok doser]

“Brutal” isn’t required for rape—only nonconsent, according to the posts we’ve seen here. Are we changing the focus to include brutality?
I know many have no need for authority in any of this discussion, but let’s consult a dictionary:
Miriam Webster’s:
: unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against a person's will or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception

What if it's carried out without the elements of forcibility or threat of injury but still is against their will?

And the "incapable of valid consent because of ... intoxication" part leads to the curious circumstances back in my marriage when my wife and I would go out for dinner and one of us would be the designated driver while the other one became intoxicated and thus incapable of valid consent. We would then go home and often engage in what otherwise would have been consensual relations, but because of the intoxication now qualifies as rape.
In other words my wife and I took turns willingly raping each other. A lot. Rape. Rape. Rape. Rape.

 

[Derf]

To you perhaps but meh.

Given the context then yeah, it was answered and that's why I brought it up as Derf doesn't consider it rape if a husband forces himself on his wife and is reduced to these silly scenarios to start with. At least you acknowledge he's an idiot for not recognizing rape for what it is, if not so much for the predictable tropes.

Why is it silly? This scenario has already occurred numerous times with unmarried couples. Why not married couples.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Why is it silly? This scenario has already occurred numerous times with unmarried couples. Why not married couples.

Rape occurs numerous times within couples whether married or not and elsewhere. The percentage of rapists being caught and tried is as low as 6% unfortunately and within relationships it's difficult to prove as MaryContrary pointed out earlier. You're advocating that a husband forcing himself on his wife isn't rape anyway so as much as Stripe prattles on he's right to call you an idiot on that score at least.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Maybe you can help me find it.

Try under 'V'. There ya go!

 

[Arthur Brain]

He gave a verdict. He thinks it's rape if a woman has regrets.

To pick up on this asinine post of yours again, no, not at all and as much as you like to throw the term 'liar' about then you've absolutely made one of yourself. Nowhere, ever on here or anywhere else have I reduced rape to anything akin. I can sure understand women having regrets after sex with certain folk but that doesn't equate to rape.

 

[Stripe]

Given the context then yeah, it was answered and that's why I brought it up as Derf doesn't consider it rape if a husband forces himself on his wife and is reduced to these silly scenarios to start with.

He's silly, you're a dishonest liar.

He presented a scenario, you changed it to chase your goal of demonizing him.

At least you acknowledge he's an idiot for not recognizing rape for what it is.

There was none in the scenario he presented.

You made it up.

You contribute nothing but spam.

 

[Stripe]

To pick up on this asinine post of yours again, no, not at all and as much as you like to throw the term 'liar' about then you've absolutely made one of yourself. Nowhere, ever on here or anywhere else have I reduced rape to anything akin. I can sure understand women having regrets after sex with certain folk but that doesn't equate to rape.

Then respond honestly to the scenario that he presented.

There was no force involved.

You made it up.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Then respond honestly to the scenario that he presented.

There was no force involved.

You made it up.

He was answered honestly. Bored much?

 

[Arthur Brain]

He's silly, you're a dishonest liar.

He presented a scenario, you changed it to chase your goal of demonizing him.

There was none in the scenario he presented.

You made it up.

You contribute nothing but spam.

Already addressed and in context. "Silly" is being generous but you continue with your lame little tropes if ya want. Once again, spam would be a step up for you frankly.

 

[Stripe]

He was answered honestly.

You believe that a woman is justified in accusing a man because she has regrets.

His scenario has no force.
You find the man guilty.

 

[Arthur Brain]

You believe that a woman is justified in accusing a man because she has regrets.

His scenario has no force.
You find the man guilty.

No I don't, at all so that's a fail.

 

[Stripe]

No I don't,

His scenario has no force.

at all so that's a fail.

You find the man guilty.

 

[Arthur Brain]

His scenario has no force.

You find the man guilty.

His scenario was lame as pointed out.

Nope. A person should only be convicted of rape if they're guilty of it. Got the memo now?

 

[Derf]

His scenario was lame as pointed out.

Nope. A person should only be convicted of rape if they're guilty of it. Got the memo now?

And how is the judge/jury to know if they're guilty? What level of evidence would you require?

 

[Arthur Brain]

And how is the judge/jury to know if they're guilty? What level of evidence would you require?

Realistically they wouldn't as so difficult to prove sans security cams in the house and bedroom. My requirement: 100% proof of guilt. You, on the other hand don't consider it rape if a husband forces himself on his wife anyway so what do you care?

 

[Derf]

Realistically they wouldn't as so difficult to prove sans security cams in the house and bedroom. My requirement: 100% proof of guilt. You, on the other hand don't consider it rape if a husband forces himself on his wife anyway so what do you care?

So you're pretty much admitting that it's a crime without a criminal--except for the very rare case, like Hunter Biden, where they videotaped themselves doing some kind of onerous activity, like sadomasochism or bondage. You know, "something else". For someone who disagrees with me so virulently, you seem to come to the same conclusions--though you don't admit it.