Consensual Sex App Pulled From Apple Store

heatlesssun said:
So it's simple. Don't touch a woman unless you're damned sure that's what she wants, and it's best to avoid women under the influence. What's so hard or evil or judgmental about thinking with the correct head?
Click to expand...

Okay, here you go: whenever a man touches a woman in any way without her express spoken or written consent, even when after the fact she stresses that it wasn't sexual assault...it is sexual assault. There can be no exceptions ever. Not even a single exception should even be viewed in its original context if it can be made to seem horrible.

Thank you for sticking to this strangely puritanical view that has led to demented and dangerous legislation in California, and perpetuates a view of men as all violent rapists-in-waiting and women cowering victims-in-waiting.
 
lilbabycat said:
You continue to overgeneralize and take statements out of context. How about you stop being willfully ignorant to what is actually being said?

Someone says "I've slept with many women that involved alcohol" and you translate it as "I only get laid with drunk women".

Someone says "I've had situations where the girl acts coy and says in specific tone Noo...*wink wink*" and you cut it down to "No means yes".

You're fucking ridiculous. How about I take your three paragraph long description of your sexual experiences and extrapolate all the sexual assaults you committed in its contents? Or assume that because you have "have sex with women in their 20's" that you are clearly taking advantage of your students? Using your thought process it would take zero effort, but I'm not you.

You are a pure hypocrite, and I have a picture of your Doctorate in Philosophy to prove it.[b/]
Click to expand...


Ducman69 said:
virtually all Japanese girls have been trained to pretend not to want it, but then "give in" while complaining
Click to expand...

Ducman69 said:
guys have been trained that when a girl is giggling and acting super drunk after half a beer and saying "gosh I'm so drunk" when hanging off you, that's supposed to code for "have your way with me" without sounding like a slut that always bones on the first date.
Click to expand...

jpm100 said:
Get fucking real, it you flat out ask [for sex], your chances of sex just dropped 90%.
Click to expand...

Now let's see that doctorate in philosophy of mine you claim to have...or are you twisting things? Careful, you've been throwing this hypocrisy label around a lot lately, might want to check your information before you post...
 
mope54 said:
So you think it's hypocrisy because you believe that saying "girls mean yes when they say no" and "we wouldn't get laid if we didn't get girls drunk first" are simple disagreements and not expressions of the same type of logic rapists use?
Click to expand...

Yes, they're simple disagreements. You choose to characterize them in a way that fits your personal worldview, and you refuse to recognize any other worldview as having any validity.

Assuming you're not completely and utterly disconnected from the world of sex, anyone can logically observe that there are situations of women saying no or feigning resistance when they, in fact, are encouraging the person in question. This has been well known for some time, and you seem unwilling to acknowledge this fact.

Simple logic: sexual relationships are complicated as fuck, and anyone who tries to legislate on a black-or-white perspective to address those complications is going to end up catching a lot of people in the net who have done nothing wrong. That's called injustice...the kind of shit that is supposedly valued by people who actually post pictures of their law degrees on the internet.
 
*That's called injustice...the kind of shit that is supposedly opposed by people who actually post pictures of their law degrees on the internet.
Click to expand...

Fuck me...is it 5pm yet?
 
Stiletto said:
Assuming you're not completely and utterly disconnected from the world of sex, anyone can logically observe that there are situations of women saying no or feigning resistance when they, in fact, are encouraging the person in question. This has been well known for some time, and you seem unwilling to acknowledge this fact.
Click to expand...
Well one of us certainly is disconnected from the world of sex, but I'll give you some pointers so you don't end up in a courtroom fighting a rape charge...

just because some women harbor a rape fantasy does not mean that they actually want to be raped! And even if they want to act out a rape fantasy, it doesn't mean they want to be raped by a stranger.

If you actually want to rape someone willingly, have an adult, sober conversation about the topic, know the person very well, and establish a set of safe words.

Short of that you're playing with very dangerous fire and to use that article to justify the toxic comments in this thread is beyond the pale.
 
mope54 said:
Now let's see that doctorate in philosophy of mine you claim to have...or are you twisting things?
Click to expand...
http://cl.ly/image/03443d1z0Z2K/IMG_1057.jpg

"doctor of philosophy in criminology, law, and society"

I shortened it too much. I suppose that should translate into you having a Doctorate in Criminology, not in Philosophy.

I personally still read it as "Doctorate in using legal jargon to excuse lawyers, politicians, and criminals into justifying being pieces of shit" or "A certificate in wasting of a third of my life in something that benefits society in no way", but that's just my opinion.
 
* whats more interesting is that you continue to deflect from the actual conversation and instead jump on my quips.

You should work on your other D's though:
The ten D's of opposition tactics are:

Deflect
Delay
Deny
Discount
Deceive
Divide
Dulcify
Discredit
Destroy
Deal
 
Stiletto said:
Thank you for sticking to this strangely puritanical view that has led to demented and dangerous legislation in California, and perpetuates a view of men as all violent rapists-in-waiting and women cowering victims-in-waiting.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that you've been intimate with a woman and from your perspective weren't exactly sure that's what she wanted?
 
mope54 said:
Well one of us certainly is disconnected from the world of sex, but I'll give you some pointers so you don't end up in a courtroom fighting a rape charge...
Click to expand...

Oh look...that implication that you claimed nobody's making. You've done it again.
 
lilbabycat said:
You continue to overgeneralize

You're fucking ridiculous.

You are a pure hypocrite
Click to expand...


lilbabycat said:
"doctor of philosophy in criminology, law, and society"

I shortened it too much. I suppose that should translate into you having a Doctorate in Criminology, not in Philosophy.
Click to expand...

lilbabycat said:
* whats more interesting is that you continue to deflect from the actual conversation[b/] and instead jump on my quips.
Click to expand...

Between the two of us, you're the one who generalized statements whereas I quoted the actual statements of the people I was referring to.

Then you tried to link my degree to philosophy presumably because you think it says something about the relative worth of the degree. Of course, once called out for that nonsense you just double down with some blatant attack on my degree.
 
heatlesssun said:
So you're saying that you've been intimate with a woman and from your perspective weren't exactly sure that's what she wanted?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's called losing your virginity. If you're male, straight, and not a virgin, you've been through it, too.
 
Stiletto said:
Oh look...that implication that you claimed nobody's making. You've done it again.
Click to expand...
Do you need help with differentiating between disagreement of one's opinion versus you saying that it's a well-known fact that women say no when they mean yes and me giving you some advice about how operating under that belief might land you in trouble?
 
I'd just like to take a second to point out that a person who is so proud of their law degree that they posted a picture of it on an internet forum as part of an argument...is busily implying that people who disagree with him are guilty of sexual assault.

American Justice, people.
 
heatlesssun said:
So you're saying that you've been intimate with a woman and from your perspective weren't exactly sure that's what she wanted?
Click to expand...

Why don't you just skip this part and just say outright that he is a sexual assailant, should be labelled a rapist, and be ostracized from society? Him and the other 90% of men in the world too, right?
 
Oh wait...I called them "him". That means I'm misogynist if he, in fact, is a she. And that I'm transphobic if they're a MtF transgender person. I forget...am I supposed to use "hir"? Is that the proper form of "ze"?
 
It's strange how much you and lilbabycat are pissed off by my degree
 
lilbabycat said:
Why don't you just skip this part and just say outright that he is a sexual assailant, should be labelled a rapist, and be ostracized from society? Him and the other 90% of men in the world too, right?
Click to expand...

Why in the world would a guy sleep with a woman he wasn't sure wanted it? You can call it whatever you want but that's just stupid.
 
mope54 said:
It's strange how much you and lilbabycat are pissed off by my degree
Click to expand...

A bit. Because its people like you that influence people who have actual power to pass laws that create "Guilty before proven innocent". You claim in earlier posts that they are made to help women from being re-victimized, but in practice it creates a lose-lose scenario for the accused. You know, but you would never admit, the way you quote people's words is a misrepresentation of whats is being conveyed. You do it unflinching, and when called out on it, continue to do so. That's why, pages and pages ago, I called you ridiculous. As that's the nicest thing that could be said about your views.
 
What's truly astonishing about some of these perspectives is that they're coming from the same people who would be busily telling right-wingers keep their laws out of people's bedrooms.
 
heatlesssun said:
Why in the world would a guy sleep with a woman he wasn't sure wanted it? You can call it whatever you want but that's just stupid.
Click to expand...

Your view is that someone who is 99% sure, shouldn't ever try to have sex with a woman, because of that 1%.

You do realize we, as in the entire population, would not exist if we lived like this, right? Or alternatively, the entire world would be filled with the spawn of actual rapists.
 
lilbabycat said:
Your view is that someone who is 99% sure, shouldn't ever try to have sex with a woman, because of that 1%.
Click to expand...

Again, why would a man have sex with a woman if the man has doubt about it? There's nothing like a woman unzipping the pants, doing the deed and than asking for it all night long.
 
lilbabycat said:
You know, but you would never admit, the way you quote people's words is a misrepresentation of whats is being conveyed. You do it unflinching, and when called out on it, continue to do so. That's why, pages and pages ago, I called you ridiculous. As that's the nicest thing that could be said about your views.
Click to expand...
If it's true that I misrepresented ducman's views and he does not really believe that sometimes no mean yes (which he stated in two different posts the first day of this discussion), then wouldn't he have come back and said that he didn't mean it to come across that way instead of telling us a story about how his girlfriend told him no the other day but he knew she really meant yes? and why would stilletto post an article claiming that women secretly harbor rape fantasies and sit here arguing that sometimes it's ok to sleep with women even if he's not sure that's what they really want?

If I'm misrepresenting their views, why are other members in the forum stepping in and posting that they're seeing that same sentiment that I'm pointing out? Are we all in it together in this grand conspiracy to effect women's rights at the expense of all these hypothetical victims of false rape accusations?
 
heatlesssun said:
I've been married for 21 years and something tells me that not many in this thread are.
Click to expand...

...and there goes another blanket derisive implication against people who dare disagree.

In all seriousness, I really wish you and the rest would cut that shit out. Civil conversation can be so much more fun.

Been with my wife 13 years, by the way. News flash: in marriage, the chance of both people 100% wanting to have sex with each other is on par with lightning strikes. Once again...you are addressing a complex part of humanity in black-or-white terms. That's foolishness.
 
mope54 said:
and why would stilletto post an article claiming that women secretly harbor rape fantasies
Click to expand...

Because it's true for many women. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that fact shows that you're the one struggling with the difference between fantasy and reality.

and sit here arguing that sometimes it's ok to sleep with women even if he's not sure that's what they really want?
Click to expand...

The other day I slept with my wife, but I didn't entirely want to, because my asshole hurt from the buffalo wings. I did it anyway, because she wanted to more than I did.

According to you and HS, that was sexual assault on her part. Well, of course, not really, because you don't believe the law works the other way around, I'm sure. You demonstrate so many double standards already, that's a reasonable deduction.

According to everyone else in the real world, that was a typical sexual encounter. They're almost always negotiations with varying levels of interest, energy, and communication. They are complex and vague and exhausting and frustrating and scary and mind-blowing and all other sorts of things.

And people like you who try to make them all fit into either box A or box B are perpetrating injustice via primitive thinking. I'm guessing the only social studies class you needed for your degree was women's studies.
 
mope54 said:
I honestly had no idea you two were this incredibly threatened by me.
Click to expand...

Fascinating.

Megalomania

Megalomania is a psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of power, relevance, omnipotence, and by inflated self-esteem. Adolf Hitler is widely considered to have been a megalomaniac. [1] Historically it was used as an old name for narcissistic personality disorder prior to the latter's first use by Heinz Kohut in 1968, and is used today as a non-clinical equivalent.[2][3] It is not mentioned in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)[4] or the International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD).
Click to expand...
 
lol, I'm less focused on me than lilbabycat and stilletto are

every post in the last day from them includes something derogatory about me as a person, my degree, or my profession...meanwhile posting that I won't stay on topic :)
 
Stiletto said:
Been with my wife 13 years, by the way. News flash: in marriage, the chance of both people 100% wanting to have sex with each other is on par with lightning strikes. Once again...you are addressing a complex part of humanity in black-or-white terms. That's foolishness.
Click to expand...

Congrats! But you were the one interjecting marriage into this and that is a different situation than doing drunk girls that a guy just met. And no, it's not black or white terms, it's called good judgment. How many bad things happen to both men and women when having casual anonymous sex that have nothing to do with fake rape allegations?

For people that are so right wing and supposedly all about personal responsibility I have no idea why these same people seem to take lightly and argue against personal responsibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top