Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (73951)	9/5/2003 12:07:10 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"what would you suggest be the penalty for the female whom the male asserted had provoked him into forcing intercourse of some sort on her? Jail?" Reparation to the victim and then jail. She should do all his laundry for 4 months.

To: E who wrote (73951)	9/5/2003 2:54:41 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 82486

"And besides creating the kinds of problems the questions raise, it may give males a kind of social permission to force..." Nothing excuses or permits the use of force. The male is totally accountable for that. For some reason our culture excuses the behavior of the female once they can find fault with the male. I dont. And for some reason if the female is found to be a contributor to the event, people are afraid that this would excuse, permit, or lesson responsibility for the behavior of the male. I dont. I have three daughters. If anyone used force on them to do anything sexual or otherwise, I will be very ticked off, and will not excuse the perpetrator. However, if my daughter went to his hotel room alone, late at night, to have drinks, and was all sexed up and participating in passionate interplay...I will also find her behavior to be out of line. When it comes to violence we hold provokees responsible. It is illegal to do anything that you know could cause the other person to escalate into a violent behavior. You can't yell at a person while poking your finger in their chest, etc. It is called harrassment and is a crime, not usually an issue unless actual violence erupts. Of course the court takes the position that violent interaction is always unwelcome and automatically illegal. It is a little more tricky with sexual stuff. A sexual advance is only illegal when one of the persons declares it unwelcome. Since it is normal for a female to decline until she has been sufficiently woo'ed through foreplay, it is also normal for the interplay to change in its dynamic from unwelcome to welcome. When people wake up with a bad hang over their perspective on what was welcome vs unwelcome the night before may be quite different than it was when they were lit. I would like to see more people than just me try to define limits that cross the line and sanctions that are reasonable. For example, if a female is teasing to the point of provoking men that she intends to put down once they get sufficiently aroused, I would consider that a form of harrassment. I know from having women friends over the years that there are women who enjoy doing this on weekend outings, and seem to find gratification in the power that they can wield over men in this fashion. I consider it a form of abuse. So, at a minimum I would like to see this type of behavior classified as a misdemeanor that carries some sort of consequence like other forms of abusive behavior do. If we are unable to clearly define a difference between flirting and the abusive teasing then it's probably a lost cause. Classes, community service and such would seem like a good place to start if provokee behavior could be legitimized. If it insites violence like bar fights between others who are being used as pawns, then possibly stiffer sentences. Some women do like to insite events that leave them in a position to receive sympathy. Women who do this usually have an audience of girl friends who are in on the mischief so it seems there is even a basis for proof in eye witness acounts. Have you ever met girls who get off on the prospect of boys fighting over them, even to the point of provoking it?