Sharks in the Septic Tank Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: one_less who wrote (73898)	9/6/2003 8:32:07 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) of 82486

It simply stated that the female should also be taken to task for any contributory (provokee) responsibility. Miniskirts and hot pants are not illegal. They meet the legal indecent exposure requirements. No one goes to jail for wearing them. It is a known cultural norm that most women want and expect to be wooed. Rational people would consider it responsible for men to make a pass and for the female to initially decline as a matter of self respect. It is called fore play to then put on charm with flowers, wining, and dining and silvery tongued carresses until the female is in the mood. And at no point yet has the woman said "No, leave me alone!" and at no point has the man used any sort of physical force. No problem yet. Date rape is a problem that involves varying degrees of confusing mixed messages and misunderstandings about what actually occured and whether or not the female had willingly acquised to the advances of the man or whether he was doltishly dense or refusing to take no for an answer. Establishing what happened and how clear it was often requires the wisdom of Solomon and the intelligence of Einstein. I'm sure juries often get it wrong, usually in favor of the man because of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" rule. And it is possible that a woman meant "No", but conveyed it in such a murky manner that the man did not understand it. It is also incumbent on them to be clear. I see a difference between that and misunderstanding signals (still rape). You don't? Misunderstanding is one thing if the situation is actually murky and the signals aren't clear. Ignoring a clear "No" is another. We all own our bodies as we own nothing else. They are us. We have an (almost) absolute right to determine what happens to them. (Almost because process of law can take away part of that right and also medical emergency while unconscious.)

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next