Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Statists tell me consent can be given by being born (social contract) or simply by being in a specific location in time (you live in State X you have agreed to the laws of that government which claims jurisdiction over you).
So why can't consent be a woman wearing a short dress, walking alone late at night, or drinking X number of beers in a bar? Or, maybe I decide consent is given by her when she breaths. It's just as arbitrary as the other measures that Statists use in affirming consent.
Help me out. I live by the non-aggression principle where the person who initiates force is always wrong. I also only follow personal contracts where two or more parties, free from duress and with the cognitive ability to do so, agree to terms as my form of consent.
Men do not have the right to get grabby with women based on the way they're dressed. That's common sense, isn't it?
But there are women who get drunk and behave in all kinds of ways and then claim they were assaulted the next day. Or they black out from alcohol. And sometimes both the man and the woman black out, and neither can remember what happened but the woman has evidence of sexual activity she doesn't recall consenting to.
It's the latter that is the problem. So what is the solution to that?
Pretty much every woman in New York I know, myself included, has had a man push or rub his penis against her on a crowded subway. So, I guess avoid public transportation, ladies. But when that Uber driver rapes you, you should have known better than to get into a car with a stranger, what are you, crazy?
BS!!!! I don't know any women that have has such an experience on the subway in NY. BS I say.
Men do not have the right to get grabby with women based on the way they're dressed. That's common sense, isn't it?
But there are women who get drunk and behave in all kinds of ways and then claim they were assaulted the next day. Or they black out from alcohol. And sometimes both the man and the woman black out, and neither can remember what happened but the woman has evidence of sexual activity she doesn't recall consenting to.
It's the latter that is the problem. So what is the solution to that?
Men do not have the right to get grabby with women based on the way they're dressed. That's common sense, isn't it?
But there are women who get drunk and behave in all kinds of ways and then claim they were assaulted the next day. Or they black out from alcohol. And sometimes both the man and the woman black out, and neither can remember what happened but the woman has evidence of sexual activity she doesn't recall consenting to.
It's the latter that is the problem. So what is the solution to that?
Men do not have the right to get grabby with women based on the way they're dressed. That's common sense, isn't it?
But there are women who get drunk and behave in all kinds of ways and then claim they were assaulted the next day. Or they black out from alcohol. And sometimes both the man and the woman black out, and neither can remember what happened but the woman has evidence of sexual activity she doesn't recall consenting to.
It's the latter that is the problem. So what is the solution to that?
It's not a problem.
If you and another party can't recall consent you'll have to chalk it up to a "whatever" and move on.
It's not their fault that immature insecure men think buying women a drink, dinner, dancing with them at the club, giving them a ride, giving them a job, gettgin their number, or inviting them over to their house entitles them to sex.
There seems to be a lot of controversy around this issue. Although there is little debate that women are not responsible for sexual assaults, do they have a duty to protect themselves? If so, how? Avoiding being alone? Not drinking to excess, avoiding skimpy clothing, what? Many individuals of both genders have expressed this opinion. And if she doesn't protect herself in whatever way is deemed necessary or fitting, is the perpetrator less at fault if an assault happens?
There seems to be a lot of controversy around this issue. Although there is little debate that women are not responsible for sexual assaults, do they have a duty to protect themselves? If so, how? Avoiding being alone? Not drinking to excess, avoiding skimpy clothing, what? Many individuals of both genders have expressed this opinion. And if she doesn't protect herself in whatever way is deemed necessary or fitting, is the perpetrator less at fault if an assault happens?
The perpetrator needs to keep his damn hands to himself. He is responsible for his actions. Period. Don't tell me people can't "control" themselves. That's a lie.
If someone burglarizes your house, do you think the sentence is less if you had a cheap lock on your door?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
