BF2S Forums Going to Sweden? Don't forget the condom.

Turquoise wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

That depends on a number of things -- how intoxicated you are is one factor, since your judgment is likely to be impaired.

Another factor is a more lurid one.  Think about the ambiguity of consent during rough sex or things like S&M.  Usually, there are certain boundaries that are established for that sort of thing, but understandably, consent can be hard to determine sometimes.

Do you get away with running someone over with your car because your judgment was impaired by alcohol?  Then it should not be a reasonable defense for rape.  Consent is near impossible to prove one way or another.  Better to protect yourself(as a man) and stay on the safe side.  All worked up? Rub one out...

I think that's a rather hyperbolic comparison, but I'm also not saying that I think forcing yourself on someone even in the middle of the moment should be without legal consequences.

I just think people don't realize how complicated these situations can be.

Personally, I'm a little paranoid of the whole thing myself.  I've never been in a situation where consent was an issue, but the simple fact that the law seems to automatically assume a woman's word is better than a man's is rather disturbing.

What it basically says to a guy is...  "Don't piss off your girlfriend (or even a one night stand), or she might accuse you of rape."

We've already seen what happened to the Duke Lacrosse players that were falsely accused of rape by a stripper.

Turquoise wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

One thing is for sure.  If indeed Assange forced his way with this woman after the condom broke, that should be considered a lesser form of rape than a case where consent is never given in the first place.  It seems a bit ridiculous to assume that someone in the heat of passion is able to just stop everything on a dime.

The problem is that this law seems to assume this is a reasonable expectation.

I agree it is a lesser evil, but you've gotta be a pretty fucked up person to keep going once the other person starts struggling and telling you to stop.

That depends on a number of things -- how intoxicated you are is one factor, since your judgment is likely to be impaired.

Another factor is a more lurid one.  Think about the ambiguity of consent during rough sex or things like S&M.  Usually, there are certain boundaries that are established for that sort of thing, but understandably, consent can be hard to determine sometimes.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

What it basically says to a guy is...  "Don't piss off your girlfriend (or even a one night stand), or she might accuse you of rape."

Its no joke, my cousin served four years for a one-night-stand 'rape'.
He'd have been out in less than two if he'd admitted it.

ghettoperson wrote:

I don't care how wasted I was, if a girl started struggling and told me to stop I would, I'm not some kind of uncontrollable animal. You've got serious problems if you think you'd behave otherwise.

ghettoperson wrote:

And I'm pretty sure that's why they have a safe-word in S&M, to determine between play and actually wanting to quit. In any case, I'm sure it'd have been reported if that had been the case.

Last edited by Turquoise (2010-12-07 06:53:28)

JohnG@lt wrote:

I once had a girl try to trick me into thinking I was the father of her kid. That should be a crime too

Last edited by Uzique (2010-12-07 07:09:55)

DBBrinson1 wrote:

I hope he goes to gitmo.

Turquoise wrote:

While invading Iraq would not have happened after a massive leak like this, I'm not so sure Gitmo wouldn't have happened.  Our system isn't well equipped to handle large amounts of terror suspects.  Detaining them under normal conditions wouldn't necessarily work.