# Teach sons not to rape. How?



## Anon Pink

According to popular opinion, women need to learn to protect themselves from men who might be rapists. You know, other than general safety stuff, how is a woman supposed to know if a man is a friendly guy or if he is isolating her to overpower and rape her? Is the coach being nice offering her a ride home or is he kidnapping her? Was the hand on my ass a result of the subway car momentum or did that guy just cop a cheap feel? Impossible!

So what do you parents of sons teach, explain and show your sons about the difference between trying to convince her to have sex with you and coercing her? How many of you have actually told your sons not to cop a cheap feel even if she is passed out? How many of you have actually explained the difference between taking the lead in sexual play and just plain taking?

What do you tell your sons?


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
I don't have kids, but if I did, 2 points on this: 

The goal picking up women is to make them want you, that otherwise sex is boring. You can't force someone to desire you, so there is nothing to be gained. Would you really want a woman who needs to be drunk, drugged, or forced to touch you?

Force is the last refuge of the incompetent. If someone ever angers you so much that you want to hurt them, YOU have lost because you have lost your self control.


----------



## thatbpguy

A few thoughts.

As to my step sons, I led by example by showing the utmost respect for all women I come in contact with- especially their mother. Next, I did have a talk with them about respect. There is a time and place for sex and not for sex and unless she is fully on board, forget it. I might add both were still virgins until they married.

As to my daughter, I told her that she needed to refrain from putting herself in any disposition where she could be taken advantage of and always be true to herself and not to give into smooth 'I love you's' by boys.


----------



## Ikaika

For us, it is a real challenge with our oldest son. He is mentally challenged and thus his mental function is at the level of a five year old but he is a 15 year old chronologically with all the raging hormones. We dreaded this day for years.

So for Kenji (I have a dedicated thread in the parenting forum), it takes constant and repetitive teaching of boundaries. We teach, we teach, we teach, we quiz, we quiz and quiz. We tell him his diagnosis is not an excuse. We worry all the time, we don't want him to hurt anyone or get hurt. Ugh, I hate the thought of this topic.


----------



## Blossom Leigh

Great topic Anon and I will get to my son in a sec, but first wanted to share this link of a brave man who speaks on this very issue...

Jackson Katz: Violence against women—it's a men's issue | Talk Video | TED.com


As a woman, I teach my son to respect me. He is five and we aren't to the sex stage yet, but we talk a LOT about kindness, responding immediately to boundaries, to pay attention to what is going on around him and as time goes all of these will be expanded to include valuing ALL non destructive choices.


----------



## badsanta

I think this question has to be asked "what do we tell our daughters to help protect them?" Since my daughter is a teenager, the wife and I have had some very serious conversations on the topic so she is not naive. 

Growing up, I never got anything from my dad (he was always verbally abusive to my mom) as it mostly came from my peers and church on how to properly treat women. 

Most important is the "presence" of the girl's father that a boy is dating, along with his gut reaction if a boy will be trusted to date his daughter. This often involves a moment alone a prospective boyfriend will have to endure with the girl's father before they he is allowed to date her. Odds are nothing sexual is discussed, but more of an overall assessment of character as well as a show of force such as him carrying the proverbial shotgun. 

When I was in high school I dated this girl. Before we went out, I had to go take a ride with her dad so he could show me his muscle car along with his guns in the backseat. I remember being anxious and that I basically spoke with her dad on how cool his car was and the importance that I not ever drive a foreign made car. Not one word was spoken about how I should treat his daughter, but the guns in the backseat got that across.

I think there is a good episode of Duck Dynasty that demonstrates this where the dad takes the boyfriend hunting to judge his character before he can date his daughter.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Holistically. 

The Wonder of Boys: Michael Gurian: Amazon.com: Books


----------



## Rowan

I think teaching - and modeling - empathy, self-control and respect for others is a really excellent place to start.


----------



## ConanHub

Raised two sons. We did not tolerate any disrespect of mom or any other female. Not politically correct but we always taught them that girls were never to be treated like one of the guys, that they were physically weaker and never to be engaged on a physical level like other boys.

I also taught a sense of responsibility, that good men protect even if it means risking harm to yourself. I always came down hard if they were caught disrespecting females and was very encouraging and supportive when they showed courtesy and respect.

My oldest son respects women and will actively speak out against misogyny and disrespect towards women. My youngest is a knight. Extremely protective, he is probably dangerous for an idiot to try anything around. He has even stood up to me when I became angry in an argument with his mother. He felt, correctly I might add, that I was being to harsh with his mother. Many of our friends are impressed with his protective and responsible nature. He is a source of great pride and joy to us.

There are some things that should be taught as serious as life and death. Don't stick your head in a wood chipper, look both ways before crossing the street, never disrespect women and absolutely never harm a woman.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

I was watching a 48 hrs program last night ... it had the Nathaniel Fujita & Lauren Astley story.. of "Breakup violence" that ended in her death... not about rape.. but VIOLENCE...

Full episode here >> Lauren Astley murder draws attention to teen breakup violence - CBS News

If you click on this &* bring it to 21:00*... there is a Program that men lead going to high schools and speaking on Teen violence to bring awareness .. I was very impressed with this and feel more of these programs should be given in our schools.... he spoke of being kind, caring , thoughtful..." that's what a real man is.... Only cowards put their hands on a woman with mean intent" the white ribbon signifies MEN standing up against violence against woman ...

One thing the mother said after her death was.. "NEVER NEVER, if you break up with a guy..do not go alone to comfort him"... this is when he killed her. 

Besides the community, our churches, also the example of the Father in a boys life is so very important too..... how he treats the mother, how he sees him treat other women..waitresses, how he speaks of other women.. all of it.. be that living example.. .. IF a son grows up seeing disrespect towards the mother, names called, control...rage... he will grow up feeling this is normal behavior...

Also to teach our sons to stand up for the underdog... any time they see someone being beaten down -people excluded out of pure mean behavior, just to ostracize another... to stand against this -against the crowd, to stand for what is right and just.

We have many conversations over many scenarios...we do not shield them from the realities of life.. often our teens come home & tell us things that happen in school, or with peers...we talk about how they feel about it... they have spoken about a football player who strangled his GF on school property, they were angry, they called him choice words...very upset that anyone could do something like that.. he was suspended & rightly so...but then she went back to him.. (they don't understand it)... I guess they are broke up again - I just asked our senior in the other room, and he said "Thank God!"... But yeah.. our sons are very disturbed by anyone who acts like this..


----------



## HuggyBear

I'm sorry... "Teach sons not to rape"? 

You've got it ALL wrong.

You have to "teach sons HOW/WHO/WHEN to rape".

It's like that old saying, "Hate isn't learned, it's taught."

When you teach or tell a kid that someone is "weaker" than them, "below" them socially, culturally, economically, or that sometimes "you just have to do it", that's when your teaching kids the WRONG thing. When you say "he/she DESERVED" some injustice perpetrated upon them, you are teaching them that rape/robbery/murder are acceptable if done to someone who was put at a disadvantage.

This "teach your son not to rape" belongs in the same dumpster as "put a dress on a boy so he knows what it feels like to be a girl.

I'll teach my son how to do right, that way I don't have to teach him how not to make mistakes.

You should even be ashamed of your lack of logic, and even asking the question.

BTW, this is The Men's Clubhouse, perhaps you should ask the LADIES how they "teach their boys not to rape"... pathetic.


----------



## Anon Pink

Excellent replies. 

However I still wonder how a parent teaches a son the difference between taking the lead and taking. This is an issue I see among younger girls and date rape. Not having sons myself, I've always wondered how this topic is handled. Your sons are going to date. They are going to want to get to certain bases. How do you teach them when it's okay to go for it and when it's not?

Huggybear, I'm not sure I follow you. Could you expand on this more?



> You have to "teach sons HOW/WHO/WHEN to rape".


----------



## Blossom Leigh

HuggyBear said:


> I'm sorry... "Teach sons not to rape"?
> 
> You've got it ALL wrong.
> 
> You have to "teach sons HOW/WHO/WHEN to rape".
> 
> It's like that old saying, "Hate isn't learned, it's taught."
> 
> When you teach or tell a kid that someone is "weaker" than them, "below" them socially, culturally, economically, or that sometimes "you just have to do it", that's when your teaching kids the WRONG thing. When you say "he/she DESERVED" some injustice perpetrated upon them, you are teaching them that rape/robbery/murder are acceptable if done to someone who was put at a disadvantage.
> 
> This "teach your son not to rape" belongs in the same dumpster as "put a dress on a boy so he knows what it feels like to be a girl.
> 
> I'll teach my son how to do right, that way I don't have to teach him how not to make mistakes.
> 
> You should even be ashamed of your lack of logic, and even asking the question.
> 
> BTW, this is The Men's Clubhouse, perhaps you should ask the LADIES how they "teach their boys not to rape"... pathetic.


:scratchhead:


----------



## SadSamIAm

I don't think we need to teach our kids not to rape. 

We need to teach them to respect others. To respect women. If they respect women, then when they are told to stop, they will stop. 

From what my son tells me, he has a bigger issue getting the girls to stop, than getting himself to. Times they are a changing!!!


----------



## NotLikeYou

And for all you female readers visiting the Men's Clubhouse who are TOTALLY about EQUALITY.....

Female teachers: The sex offenders no one suspects | UK Progressive

Ladies, I look forward to you joining me and condemning (in writing) these hateful pedophile predators.


----------



## Broken at 20

Well, the basic right and wrong argument tends to do wonders. 

As for not raping, there isn't a whole lot that can be done.
You're always going to have people that break the law. There will always be murderers, bank robbers, and rapist. 


If you really want to try something, I would suggest scaring the sh!t out of your sons.
I am personally terrified of doing anything with any of my female peers in college. 
If they have a boyfriend and hook up with me, well a few tears and a phone call to the police and I end up in jail facing a rape charge. She can escape telling her boyfriend she cheated and was drunk by saying I raped her. 
And there is the whole "Can't give consent when intoxicated," argument. Which I have never understood. 
Because would that mean all the WW on here who's affairs started as a drunken ONS are actually rape? So when you're married, it's an affair, but when you're single, it's rape? 
So if we're both drunk, and I hook up with someone, well it is now legally defined as rape. Good to know. 

Most sons know to not rape. Just like they should know to not steal, kill, maim, etc.


----------



## SurpriseMyself

Blossom Leigh said:


> Jackson Katz: Violence against women—it's a men's issue | Talk Video | TED.com


This!

When the dominant majority join the conversation and gain the awareness and courage to enact change, society will finally shift in a way that has been needed for too long.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon Pink

> I don't think we need to teach our kids not to rape.
> 
> We need to teach them to respect others. To respect women. If they respect women, then when they are told to stop, they will stop.
> 
> From what my son tells me, he has a bigger issue getting the girls to stop, than getting himself to. Times they are a changing!!!


SOOO we don't need to teach our sons not to rape, but we do need to teach our daughters how not to get raped?

I mean if everyone thinks the important thing is to teach our sons to be good people and that's all they need to know in order to not be little rapists in training, then why do we need to teach our daughters not to get raped?

Not picking on you specifically Sam, several others have said roughly the same thing about teaching our sons to be good men? I don't get it. Why do we need to simply focus on being good men with our sons but our daughters get a whole semester worth of instruction on not to be raped? Something's not right here...


----------



## Anon Pink

Blossom Leigh said:


> Great topic Anon and I will get to my son in a sec, but first wanted to share this link of a brave man who speaks on this very issue...
> 
> Jackson Katz: Violence against women—it's a men's issue | Talk Video | TED.com
> .


Take away points from that TEDTalk..


> "I don't see these as women's issues that some good men help out with. In fact, I'm going to argue that these are men's issues, first and foremost.
> 
> "Because the typical perpetrator is not sick and twisted. He's a normal guy in every other way. Isn't he?"
> 
> "And I just want to give you the highlights of the bystander approach, ....
> 
> "Now, when it comes to men and male culture, the goal is to get men who are not abusive to challenge men who are. And when I say abusive, I don't mean just men who are beating women.
> 
> "So, for example, if you're a guy and you're in a group of guys playing poker, talking, hanging out, no women present, and another guy says something sexist or degrading or harassing about women, instead of laughing along or pretending you didn't hear it, we need men to say, "Hey, that's not funny. You know, that could be my sister you're talking about, and could you joke about something else? Or could you talk about something else? I don't appreciate that kind of talk." *Just like if you're a white person and another white person makes a racist comment,* you'd hope, I hope, that white people would interrupt that racist enactment by a fellow white person. *Just like with heterosexism, *if you're a heterosexual person and you yourself don't enact harassing or abusive behaviors towards people of varying sexual orientations, *if you don't say something in the face of other heterosexual people doing that, then, in a sense, isn't your silence a form of consent and complicity?*


And so I ask again, if it MEN doing the raping, why do we spend so much time teaching our daughters not to get raped when we should be teaching our sons Not To Rape?


----------



## Anon Pink

NotLikeYou said:


> And for all you female readers visiting the Men's Clubhouse who are TOTALLY about EQUALITY.....
> 
> Female teachers: The sex offenders no one suspects | UK Progressive
> 
> Ladies, I look forward to you joining me and condemning (in writing) these hateful pedophile predators.


Oh don't you worry dear. You see, women have always lost social status when they take cougar tendencies toward the pubescent. There is the ex wife of a multimillionaire, in my town who had sex multiple times with her 15 year old son's best friend. She's going down Big Time! 

For the record, Cougars...ick! Why the hell would any woman want a boy with training wheels on his d!ck?


----------



## ConanHub

I think teaching girls to be aware and prepared is never going away unfortunately. I definitely agree with confronting or challenging crappy attitudes towards women in male circles.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Oh don't you worry dear. You see, women have always lost social status when they take cougar tendencies toward the pubescent. There is the ex wife of a multimillionaire, in my town who had sex multiple times with her 15 year old son's best friend. She's going down Big Time!
> 
> For the record, Cougars...ick! Why the hell would any woman want a boy with training wheels on his d!ck?


Because being sniffed at in the grocery store by other women is exactly the same as 20 years of hard time? :scratchhead:


----------



## ConanHub

Anon Pink said:


> Oh don't you worry dear. You see, women have always lost social status when they take cougar tendencies toward the pubescent. There is the ex wife of a multimillionaire, in my town who had sex multiple times with her 15 year old son's best friend. She's going down Big Time!
> 
> For the record, Cougars...ick! Why the hell would any woman want a boy with training wheels on his d!ck?


Unchecked lust.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> Because being sniffed at in the grocery store by other women is exactly the same as 20 years of hard time? :scratchhead:


What? Are you suggesting she won't get jail time? She will! She is going to jail!


----------



## Faithful Wife

We have to teach everyone not to rape OR cross anyone's boundaries, period. Men, women, everyone needs to be taught this. That means teaching everyone about enthusiastic consent.

But there are a some areas where we also need to teach our boys not only not to rape/sexually assualt others, but also how not to get raped or be sexually assualted...by MEN:

Inside Story: When man rapes man: Victims daren't report it, the law won't recognise it, the public can't understand it: but gradually the taboos around male rape are breaking down, reports Simon Garfield - Life and Style - The Independent

The rape of men: the darkest secret of war | Society | The Guardian

Sayreville football scandal: How much hazing goes on in high school locker rooms? No one knows... | NJ.com

And yes..maybe it is time that we openly tell our young children that men and women and teens can be sexual predators, they are all around you and you don't know who it will be...that's right kids, no one is safe. Let's just face it, this is where we are at and tell our children they basically need to know about boundaries and consent from the time they are allowed away from their parents to go to preschool.


----------



## ConanHub

Decent input FW.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

Blossom Leigh said:


> Great topic Anon and I will get to my son in a sec, but first wanted to share this link of a brave man who speaks on this very issue...
> 
> Jackson Katz: Violence against women—it's a men's issue | Talk Video | TED.com
> 
> 
> As a woman, I teach my son to respect me. He is five and we aren't to the sex stage yet, but we talk a LOT about kindness, responding immediately to boundaries, to pay attention to what is going on around him and as time goes all of these will be expanded to include valuing ALL non destructive choices.


Very good TedTalk... I wonder how many of the men here watched it.

What Men Can Do to Prevent Gender Violence


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> What? Are you suggesting she won't get jail time? She will! She is going to jail!


You said she lost status, not that she went to jail.


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> You said she lost status, not that she went to jail.


Hasn't come to trial yet. 

The point I was making about the loss of social status is that women have always lost social status for their sexuality while men have not, except for men coming out as gay or men busted with abusing children. But an old guy with a 15-16 year old girl...no loss of social status, old guy with a 19 year old...high fives all around!


----------



## EleGirl

NotLikeYou said:


> And for all you female readers visiting the Men's Clubhouse who are TOTALLY about EQUALITY.....
> 
> Female teachers: The sex offenders no one suspects | UK Progressive
> 
> Ladies, I look forward to you joining me and condemning (in writing) these hateful pedophile predators.


I don't know why you think this is such a big challenge to women? Of course we will join you in condemning women who prey on young boys and girls. They do exist.

Have you ever seen the movie "Summer of '42"? I came out in 1971. The movie was about the sexual coming out of a high school boy with a beautiful young woman whose husband was at war. In 1971, it was considered a nostalgic love story of what every high school boy wanted and deserved to experience in their life.

It used to be that when a high school boy was able to get an adult women in the sack, that they were envied by their high school male friends. And their father's were quite proud.

Do you know why it is now illegal for adult women to have sex with a high school boy? Because of the women fighting laws that raised the age of consent and that made it non-gender specific.

So you can think the women's movement and men who get it for this now being a crime.


----------



## EleGirl

Faithful Wife said:


> We have to teach everyone not to rape OR cross anyone's boundaries, period. Men, women, everyone needs to be taught this. That means teaching everyone about enthusiastic consent.
> 
> But there are a some areas where we also need to teach our boys not only not to rape/sexually assualt others, but also how not to get raped or be sexually assualted...by MEN:
> 
> Inside Story: When man rapes man: Victims daren't report it, the law won't recognise it, the public can't understand it: but gradually the taboos around male rape are breaking down, reports Simon Garfield - Life and Style - The Independent
> 
> The rape of men: the darkest secret of war | Society | The Guardian
> 
> Sayreville football scandal: How much hazing goes on in high school locker rooms? No one knows... | NJ.com
> 
> And yes..maybe it is time that we openly tell our young children that men and women and teens can be sexual predators, they are all around you and you don't know who it will be...that's right kids, no one is safe. Let's just face it, this is where we are at and tell our children they basically need to know about boundaries and consent from the time they are allowed away from their parents to go to preschool.


I don't get this. Men are victims of rape as well. You'd think that men would be out there marching to end rape of males.

Prison rapes of men is a huge problem in this country. In 2006 there were over 2,205 allegations of inmate-on-inmate non-consensual sexual acts reported in the U.S. prison system.


But every time we hear about someone going to prison, even if it's because they did something very small and non-violent, several men will post joking about the guy being raped in prison. What exactly is funny about that?

This is the kind of thing that men need to start doing. When a man laughs at and makes jokes about rape... just tell that idiot that it's not funny and not appropriate to joke about it.

How about he men's groups that fought Facebook because they wanted Facebook to allow them to post rape jokes and jokes about abusing women? Many men came out in support of these idiots saying that it was feminist trying to take their rights way.


----------



## EleGirl

Anon Pink said:


> Hasn't come to trial yet.
> 
> The point I was making about the loss of social status is that women have always lost social status for their sexuality while men have not, except for men coming out as gay or men busted with abusing children. But an old guy with a 15-16 year old girl...no loss of social status, old guy with a 19 year old...high fives all around!


When my daughter was 14, almost every adult male in the bowling alley was all over her. They were making fools of themselves. It was disturbing. They all knew how old she was. But that did matter. 

It was like this just about anywhere we went. She's tall, well built, long dark hair... the fact that she was very young did not matter to a lot of men.


----------



## ConanHub

That culture does need put down. Maybe it is considered macho. I don't know and have never understood. Humans in general often confuse me. Those men you spoke of would not last long in my company. I really don't know why those attitudes don't make them social pariahs.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Hasn't come to trial yet.
> 
> The point I was making about the loss of social status is that women have always lost social status for their sexuality while men have not, except for men coming out as gay or men busted with abusing children. But an old guy with a 15-16 year old girl...no loss of social status, old guy with a 19 year old...high fives all around!


An old guy with a 15 year old goes to jail and is put on a sex offender list. Anyone can look him up. He has to state where he is living. He is now a felon and a 'rapist'.

And any woman who starts to date him who runs his name...they will be running for the hills.

It is historically true that nothing happens to a woman who sleeps with a 15 year old except some tut tutting. Only now is it slowly changing.

I saw a man come into a bar with a 20 something on his arm. He was 60. All of my group (all men) rolled our eyes at the May November romance. While we all wanted the GIRL, we were not exactly holding him in esteem. Sugar Daddy generally set the tone.

That guy who married Anna Nicole...how many high fives did he get?

It is more culturally acceptable for a man to have younger women...but it strongly depends on circumstances. I have heard quite a few women say quite pungent things about men who 'can't date their age' and need 'little girls'.

So I do not think this is a simple as you are making it out.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Anon Pink said:


> SOOO we don't need to teach our sons not to rape, but we do need to teach our daughters how not to get raped?
> 
> I mean if everyone thinks the important thing is to teach our sons to be good people and that's all they need to know in order to not be little rapists in training, then why do we need to teach our daughters not to get raped?
> 
> Not picking on you specifically Sam, several others have said roughly the same thing about teaching our sons to be good men? I don't get it. Why do we need to simply focus on being good men with our sons but our daughters get a whole semester worth of instruction on not to be raped? Something's not right here...


Both should be taught..the reality is... many of our kids come from grossly dysfunctional homes & examples... if our young people doesn't have any mentors to influence them along the way in life.... to break the cycle of what they have seen, experienced...in addition to that... we can never be free of mental illness & if someone is just plain dangerous ..

Even those with a sound mind, with few if any examples to inspire for the good... they may grow a hard emotional shell... loose their conscience along the way...it makes it easier to survive...what if they are raised around gangs , rap music...no Father...how will this effect their outlook on women, on love, on their futures...

I feel both ends needs to be diligent but it would be more effective to have our Men teach the boys to put women 1st.. to care about our issues ...and Women to be in tuned to teach our daughters how to select the good guys and not give in to those with red flags of hurtful behavior...and to do all to protect themselves as well.. given we can't predict where a man's head is at or what he may have lurking inside or be capable of.


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> An old guy with a 15 year old goes to jail and is put on a sex offender list. Anyone can look him up. He has to state where he is living. He is now a felon and a 'rapist'.
> 
> And any woman who starts to date him who runs his name...they will be running for the hills.
> 
> I saw a man come into a bar with a 20 something on his arm. He was 60. All of my group (all men) rolled our eyes at the May November romance. While we all wanted the GIRL, we were not exactly holding him in esteem. Sugar Daddy generally set the tone.
> 
> That guy who married Anna Nicole...how many high fives did he get?
> 
> It is more culturally acceptable for a man to have younger women...but it strongly depends on circumstances. I have heard quite a few women say quite pungent things about men who 'can't date their age' and need 'little girls'.
> 
> So I do not think this is a simple as you are making it out.


You rightly point out that the tide is slowly turning toward a less sexist double standard. However, Hugh Hefner comes to mind.

Stop getting me off track here!

The point of this thread is to discover what western culture deems appropriate lessons to teach our sons not to rape.


----------



## Anon Pink

SimplyAmorous said:


> Both should be taught..the reality is... many of our kids come from grossly dysfunctional homes & examples... if our young people doesn't have any mentors to influence them along the way in life.... to break the cycle of what they have seen, experienced...in addition to that... we can never be free of mental illness & if someone is just plain dangerous ..
> 
> Even those with a sound mind, with few if any examples to inspire for the good... they may grow a hard emotional shell... loose their conscience along the way...it makes it easier to survive...what if they are raised around gangs , rap music...no Father...how will this effect their outlook on women, on love, on their futures...
> 
> I feel both ends needs to be diligent but it would be more effective to have our Men teach the boys to put women 1st.. to care about our issues ...and Women to be in tuned to teach our daughters how to select the good guys and not give in to those with red flags of hurtful behavior...and to do all to protect themselves as well.. given we can't predict where a man's head is at or what he may have lurking inside or be capable of.


SA, you're preaching to the choir here about role models and mentors. The fact is, we have many young men without fathers in their lives but not all of those boys are going to grow up to be rapists. 

I am a little disappointed that you, as a mother of sons who had so much to say about women bearing responsibility for not being raped, have so little to say about men not being rapists? 

I know that you are a good person, a loving wife and mother and I know you are not given to double standard acceptance. 

Young men who have never learned limits? Young men who have a sense of entitlement? Young men who see women as property to be taken? Young men who think copping a quick feel on a dare is fun? The old elbow to her tits, knee to her behind, grab her hips and squeeze... Happens all the time... Men laugh it off. I got groped while giving a speech for christs sake! Felt a hand on my ass... Kept on talking and pretended nothing was happening. Stupid...shouldda made a huge scene eh?


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> That culture does need put down. Maybe it is considered macho. I don't know and have never understood. Humans in general often confuse me. Those men you spoke of would not last long in my company. I really don't know why those attitudes don't make them social pariahs.


Which men? Who was this a reply to?


----------



## ConanHub

Could have turned it into a self defense demonstration Anon?&#55357;&#56833;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub

EleGirl said:


> Which men? Who was this a reply to?


Those you described as trying to push for rape jokes on FB. I also don't get the whole approval of rape in prison thing.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon Pink

ConanHub said:


> Could have turned it into a self defense demonstration Anon?��
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


And there is the problem. I remained quiet about it because the speech was in gratitude for fundraising for a particular cause. It was one of two potential men. Both HUGE contributors. I choose to shut up and take the money.


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> Those you described as trying to push for rape jokes on FB. I also don't get the whole approval of rape in prison thing.


I am very sensitive about the prison rape issue.

A high school friend of mine was with a group of his peers graduation week. They found an abandoned car in a field. They had all been drinking celebrating graduation. It turned out that the car had been stolen and the kids were arrested. My friend took the fall for all the kids. It was his first offense. he was sentenced to hard time in the state petitionary. 

This was the year that my father thought he'd go into semi retirement and he took a job on the state parole board. He visited this kid often and tried get him out of the prison. The kid kept telling my father that the older inmates told him that his turn was coming and threatening him. Then one day, they told him that this was the night that they were going to gang rape him. My father tried hard to get him moved.

In the morning they found this young guy hanging in his cell. He hung himself rather than be subjected to gang rape. 

My father came home that day in a mad rage. My family has seen a lot of awful things, but nothing had ever gotten my father so angry. He quit the parole board job and went back to his old career. 

When I think of prison rape, I think of this kid. How anyone can make jokes about it is beyond me.

But men make these jokes all the time.


----------



## Pollo

Anon Pink said:


> SOOO we don't need to teach our sons not to rape, but we do need to teach our daughters how not to get raped?
> 
> I mean if everyone thinks the important thing is to teach our sons to be good people and that's all they need to know in order to not be little rapists in training, then why do we need to teach our daughters not to get raped?
> 
> Not picking on you specifically Sam, several others have said roughly the same thing about teaching our sons to be good men? I don't get it. Why do we need to simply focus on being good men with our sons but our daughters get a whole semester worth of instruction on not to be raped? Something's not right here...


It's called reality. Do you think teaching people not to commit crimes is going to stop crimes? The whole sexism part of this argument is ridiculous. 

Criminals will always exist no matter what you do, in this situation it's important to tell women how to avoid putting themselves in dangerous situations because those situations will always be there. Stop trying to blame men, this is a crime problem, not a sexism problem.


----------



## ConanHub

Pressure sucks! You have more forbearance than I.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

Pollo said:


> It's called reality. Do you think teaching people not to commit crimes is going to stop crimes? The whole sexism part of this argument is ridiculous.
> 
> Criminals will always exist no matter what you do, in this situation it's important to tell women how to avoid putting themselves in dangerous situations because those situations will always be there. Stop trying to blame men, this is a crime problem, not a sexism problem.


We teach our children that it is wrong to steal, kill, assault, and so forth. So yes we can and do teach people to not commit crimes. What do you think parents do when they raise children.

And of course men can be taught to not rape and to not think that they have the right to do anything they want to anther person if they want to.

We can teach boys (who grow into men) that rape is not funny. Rape jokes are not funny. That groping women is not acceptable.


----------



## ConanHub

Very sorry and a very outraged Eli. I honestly think the prison system is horribly broken in that area. When someone is in custody their well being should be paramount. It is institutional, that thinking. I know and am friends with a lot of cops and many do not consider prisoner safety a high priority.

I've gotten very hot and embarrassed more than one officer over the issue.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> You rightly point out that the tide is slowly turning toward a less sexist double standard. However, Hugh Hefner comes to mind.
> 
> *Stop getting me off track here!*
> 
> The point of this thread is to discover what western culture deems appropriate lessons to teach our sons not to rape.


I am totally sympathetic to the bolded portion.


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> Very sorry and a very outraged Eli. I honestly think the prison system is horribly broken in that area. When someone is in custody their well being should be paramount. It is institutional, that thinking. I know and am friends with a lot of cops and many do not consider prisoner safety a high priority.
> 
> I've gotten very hot and embarrassed more than one officer over the issue.


:iagree: And thanks for holding their feet to the fire on this topic.

Another thing to consider on this topic. We know that when men are sexually abuse/raped, many of them become sexually aggressive. I'm pretty sure that allowing rape in prison turns some percentage of the prison victims into rapists. It's a spiral.

Recently I read that male victims of prison rape say that the biggest offenders are the male prison guards. This is a scary thought.


----------



## Mr.Fisty

If you come from a healthier household, don't place any children on a pedestal. From an early age, let them face the consequences of their actions, and try not to shield them from it. Honestly, some parents don't do their children any favors by babying them. "Oh, my Johnny will never do such a thing."

Of course if their children does anything wrong, they feel like it is a reflection of them as a parent. Some of it is, and some of it can be outside influences. The whole crowd mentality thing is quite disturbing. I don't remember the story well, but a lot of boys gang raped a few cheerleaders. Parents got angry that their school shut down the rest of the football season. We have to teach children to separate from a group mentality too. When hanging out in a group, that group may devolve to the group's lowest common denominator.

Not sure what you can do about mentally unstable people though.


----------



## heartsbeating

Faithful Wife said:


> And yes..maybe it is time that we openly tell our young children that men and women and teens can be sexual predators, they are all around you and you don't know who it will be...that's right kids, no one is safe. Let's just face it, this is where we are at and tell our children they basically need to know about boundaries and consent from the time they are allowed away from their parents to go to preschool.


:iagree:


----------



## ConanHub

I think teaching our boys to be brave and take a stand against"group" thinking or any form of evil is helpful.

My youngest son is absolutely fearless when confrontation is needed.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Anon Pink said:


> SA, you're preaching to the choir here about role models and mentors. The fact is, we have many young men without fathers in their lives but not all of those boys are going to grow up to be rapists.
> 
> I am a little disappointed that you, as a mother of sons who had so much to say about women bearing responsibility for not being raped, have so little to say about men not being rapists?


 Yeah I am fully aware I have a target on my back by all the feminists here....and I worry more about my daughter being taken advantage of by men or being harmed by them over what my sons will do to a woman.. 

Well I could do a whole thread on what we teach our sons but I really don't think it would get much acceptance on this forum ... 



> I know that you are a good person, a loving wife and mother and I know you are not given to double standard acceptance.


 You are absolutely right, our sons hold themselves to the same standard they would expect of the woman...



> Young men who have never learned limits?


 My take.. not enough discipline but with any discipline, it has to be balanced with LOVE, the child feeling accepted, wanted, understood even when they have bad thoughts, or do a stupid thing... we don't expect them to be perfect... but honesty always & to consider others in everything...boundaries are hugely important ....(One of my favorite books by Town & Cloudsend)... if we don't show Love and understanding ..they will REBEL...either inwardly , or outwardly in society.



> Young men who have a sense of entitlement?


 Do you think some teens are spoiled , they get everything they want - they feel it's there's for the taking, too much EGO.. parents can PRAISE their brats too much too.. and not give them constructive criticism along the way...and consequences so they can feel their feet in the fire..... there has to be a balance in all of this.. for a healthy individual to emerge. 



> Young men who have never learned limits? Young men who have a sense of entitlement? Young men who see women as property to be taken? Young men who think copping a quick feel on a dare is fun? The old elbow to her tits, knee to her behind, grab her hips and squeeze... Happens all the time... Men laugh it off. I got groped while giving a speech for christs sake! Felt a hand on my ass... Kept on talking and pretended nothing was happening. Stupid...shouldda made a huge scene eh?


I don't have the answers for all of this.. if they have no value system or empathy... there are sick people out there... this will never go away..



> *Mr.Fisty said* : If you come from a healthier household, don't place any children on a pedestal. From an early age, let them face the consequences of their actions, and try not to shield them from it. Honestly, some parents don't do their children any favors by babying them. "Oh, my Johnny will never do such a thing."
> 
> Of course if their children does anything wrong, they feel like it is a reflection of them as a parent. Some of it is, and some of it can be outside influences. The whole crowd mentality thing is quite disturbing. I don't remember the story well, but a lot of boys gang raped a few cheerleaders. Parents got angry that their school shut down the rest of the football season. We have to teach children to separate from a group mentality too. When hanging out in a group, that group may devolve to the group's lowest common denominator.
> 
> Not sure what you can do about mentally unstable people though.


:iagree::iagree::iagree:


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> I think teaching our boys to be brave and take a stand against "group" thinking or any form of evil is helpful.
> 
> My youngest son is absolutely fearless when confrontation is needed.


This is teaching your son to be a true leader. It's the right way to raise children.


----------



## ConanHub

EleGirl said:


> This is teaching your son to be a true leader. It's the right way to raise children.


Thank you!&#55357;&#56842; That boy has even taken me to task more than once. His concern was even justified on one occasion but his focus is always welcome by me. I have always shared my success and downfalls with him. I have let him see where I am weak and how to learn from it. My relationship with his mom has never been off the table for discussion and examination.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## unbelievable

From his earliest days I taught my son that he was responsible for his actions and to respect the persons and property of all people. I taught him that females deserved even greater than normal respect. I taught my daughters to respect themselves, to expect respectful treatment from guys, and to not hang around with guys who treated them or spoke to them in a disrespectful, manipulative, controlling, or threatening manner. When they were old enough to date, I made it clear to the young men who came around that I was more than happy to make them disappear and more than capable of making that happen should they hurt my baby. They had no problems and neither did I.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

unbelievable said:


> *From his earliest days I taught my son that he was responsible for his actions and to respect the persons and property of all people. I taught him that females deserved even greater than normal respect. I taught my daughters to respect themselves, to expect respectful treatment from guys, and to not hang around with guys who treated them or spoke to them in a disrespectful, manipulative, controlling, or threatening manner. * When they were old enough to date, I made it clear to the young men who came around that I was more than happy to make them disappear and more than capable of making that happen should they hurt my baby. They had no problems and neither did I.










your last line here makes me think of this T-shirt I put on this thread a while back...http://talkaboutmarriage.com/ladies-lounge/201042-feminist-father.html ...










This was the T-shirt shown in the opening post (the link is now gone)...


----------



## MachoMcCoy

Every year my issue is all of the pink in October, yet nobody knows what the color is for prostate cancer awareness, recently changed to "men's health awareness", or what month it is (powder blue, November). This year was even better. Not only did we ignore men's health awareness altogether, but we replaced it with "Men, stop being a$$holes" month. It was kicked off with that viral catcalls video and went right into the rape culture on college campuses.

That is my long winded way, Anon, of thanking you for at least waiting until the end of men's health awareness month before you jumped on the "men, stop being a$$holes" bandwagon. That means a lot to me.


----------



## Zouz

first Daughter 16 , barbie girl , peaceful ,over protectect.
2nd girl , 14 less protective as the quy who tried to touch her at school had 5 stitches immediately .

Son is still you , when He grows up I will show him the stitches ...


----------



## ConanHub

Sounds like a cool story Zous. Could you explain more? I don't understand.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## notmyrealname4

Anon Pink said:


> So what do you parents of sons teach, explain and show your sons about the difference between* trying to convince her to have sex with you *and coercing her?


No-one should have to "convince" anyone to have sex with them.

It should just happen: naturally and mutually.

That would be my advice to everyone; not just teenagers.


----------



## richie33

Hate the title of this thread. I understand the conversation and some good could come out of it but it gets under my skin.


----------



## jorgegene

My Dad never taught me anything except for by example the way he treated my Mom especially and other women in general. Never once did we have a 'birds and bees' or how to treat women talk. But the way he treated my Mom was more than enough to teach me. And he wasn't a doormat either. 

As an aside, I can't stand men who come on strong. I witness sometimes in bars dudes trying to make it with some gal, and it just infuriates me. Sometimes they just don't want to take no for an answer. I'm not talking about attacking her, but just being obnoxious and entitled like they're some kind of prize. Really pees me off. 

Just by example is the best way IMHO. By example I learned to always let the woman lead. Let the women set the pace of the relationship. Let her know what you can do and when you can do it. When she's ready. Not before. Worked for my Dad. Worked for me.


----------



## RandomDude

SimplyAmorous said:


> your last line here makes me think of this T-shirt I put on this thread a while back...http://talkaboutmarriage.com/ladies-lounge/201042-feminist-father.html ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This was the T-shirt shown in the opening post (the link is now gone)...


I am SO wearing this when my daughter comes of age and introduces me to her first boyfriend.


----------



## Mr.Fisty

RandomDude said:


> I am SO wearing this when my daughter comes of age and introduces me to her first boyfriend.



Or a baseball bat, and knock his balls out of the park.


----------



## that.girl

Many of you say you teach by example. This works fine to teach respect, but not so well where sexuality is concerned. 
You can't show by example how to react when a woman says no. Or what to do when she says yes and changes her mind. Or what to do when your date is heavily intoxicated but says yes. You can't teach by example how to react when your date freezes up and doesn't say no or yes or anything at all.
I don't think it's fair to expect a hormonal teenage boy to know intuitively how to deal with these adult situations. That's why they need to be discussed openly.


----------



## RandomDude

Mr.Fisty said:


> Or a baseball bat, and knock his balls out of the park.


Ey? Nah I think this would suffice instead:


----------



## T&T

Anon Pink said:


> So what do you parents of sons teach, explain and show your sons about the difference between trying to convince her to have sex with you and coercing her? How many of you have actually told your sons not to cop a cheap feel even if she is passed out? How many of you have actually explained the difference between taking the lead in sexual play and just plain taking?
> 
> What do you tell your sons?


That no means NO!!and to have respect for women.

Also, we taught them at an early age:

To protect females.

To protect weaker males.

Stand up for what is right. Do the RIGHT thing, not what everyone else is doing.

Stand up to that bully on the playground.

Don't follow the "crowd"

Be your own person!

Restraint when provoked.


----------



## tulsy

unbelievable said:


> *From his earliest days* I taught my son that he was responsible for his actions and to respect the persons and property of all people. *I taught him that females deserved even greater than normal respect*. ...


So you taught him to put women on a pedestal.

I teach my kids to treat everyone equally, regardless of race or gender. Women are not deserving of greater respect than men; they deserve to be treated equally.

I don't believe it's right to teach your sons that women deserve to be treated better than men.


----------



## SadSamIAm

tulsy said:


> So you taught him to put women on a pedestal.
> 
> I teach my kids to treat everyone equally, regardless of race or gender. Women are not deserving of greater respect than men; they deserve to be treated equally.
> 
> I don't believe it's right to teach your sons that women deserve to be treated better than men.


I believe that women deserve equal rights.

But I don't agree with you above. Guess I am still old fashioned.

I teach my sons to Open doors for women. 

I teach my sons to give up his seat on the bus if there is a woman standing in the aisle.

I teach my sons to help a woman if she is carrying something that looks heavy.

I think this is showing respect for women.


----------



## EleGirl

MachoMcCoy said:


> Every year my issue is all of the pink in October, yet nobody knows what the color is for prostate cancer awareness, recently changed to "men's health awareness", or what month it is (powder blue, November). This year was even better. Not only did we ignore men's health awareness altogether, but we replaced it with "Men, stop being a$$holes" month. It was kicked off with that viral catcalls video and went right into the rape culture on college campuses.
> 
> That is my long winded way, Anon, of thanking you for at least waiting until the end of men's health awareness month before you jumped on the "men, stop being a$$holes" bandwagon. That means a lot to me.


This thread was in response to 2 threads in which men were telling women that they are responsible for rape because women dress slvty and drink.

It's not an attack on men. It's are reply to what some men have been saying.


----------



## Shoto1984

richie33 said:


> Hate the title of this thread. I understand the conversation and some good could come out of it but it gets under my skin.


Agree. Which leads me to a thought about the numbers. There is a statistic that gets thrown around that something like 3 or 4 out of 5 women get raped or sexually assaulted (correct me please). Maybe the definition of those things are sufficiently vague to allow for a broad range of events but those numbers lead me to a conclusion that there are a whole lot of males out there raping and sexually assaulting women. Either that or there is a lesser number of men doing these things but are very active in doing it. Personally I would be shocked to learn that any of my male friends have ever done anything that would fall into the categories of rape or sexual assault. I would expect everyone I know to be the guys who are helping a drunk woman get home safely or stepping in when a woman looks like she needs any kind of help. I'm just wondering if the teaching might be more effective at reducing the events if it were targeted at some group that tends to more often be the perpetrators. Socially and politically touchy stuff but I wondering what the studies show on that (if anything).


----------



## Anon Pink

MachoMcCoy said:


> Every year my issue is all of the pink in October, yet nobody knows what the color is for prostate cancer awareness, recently changed to "men's health awareness", or what month it is (powder blue, November). This year was even better. Not only did we ignore men's health awareness altogether, but we replaced it with "Men, stop being a$$holes" month. It was kicked off with that viral catcalls video and went right into the rape culture on college campuses.
> 
> That is my long winded way, Anon, of thanking you for at least waiting until the end of men's health awareness month before you jumped on the "men, stop being a$$holes" bandwagon. That means a lot to me.


1. I like pink! Every month should be pink!

2. I personally don't think we need a breast cancer awareness month, or even a week. The awareness on breast cancer has reached saturation levels. What we need is a cure for cancer! However, breast cancer survivors are mostly women who have had their bodies irrevocably altered by cancer and the opportunity to come together and support one another is priceless. 

3. Nope, do not know the color for prostate cancer ribbon. Do you know the color for bone cancer? It's black! BLACK!!! Who the hell picked BLACK???? I'm not wearing a damn black ribbon and I don't think bone cancer survivors even have a month. 

4. You seem to be under the impression that talking about one issue means the other issue is less important. This is not true. Maybe I misread your post, but it seemed like you expected that less people be dialoging about gender violence in favor of dialoging about prostate cancer and that you are owed some sort of apology because your issue has been over looked. Not happening. But I will encourage you to create your own thread on an issue you care about.


----------



## MaritimeGuy

Anon Pink said:


> I mean if everyone thinks the important thing is to teach our sons to be good people and that's all they need to know in order to not be little rapists in training, then why do we need to teach our daughters not to get raped?


Because a woman can get raped by any one of a few billion men out there. She can't know what's in the mind of every man she meets so has to be careful. 

In order not to rape a man simply has to not rape. He makes that call of his own volition. 

As far as I'm concerned anyone that has the capacity to rape a woman he has it long before they're old enough for any sex talk. Rape is not about sex. It's about power. If you want your son to have sound morals you need to start long before puberty.


----------



## RandomDude

I had planned to train my daughter at an early age in martial training however she has zero interest at present times  Pity, considering daddy has so much to pass on... *sigh*

I'll insist on it later however, I don't want to end up worrying non-stop once she comes of age - she's my only child! Bah! But instead of being my little warrior all she wants to be is my little princess -.-

It sucks!


----------



## Anon Pink

Shoto1984 said:


> Agree. Which leads me to a thought about the numbers. There is a statistic that gets thrown around that something like 3 or 4 out of 5 women get raped or sexually assaulted (correct me please). Maybe the definition of those things are sufficiently vague to allow for a broad range of events but those numbers lead me to a conclusion that there are a whole lot of males out there raping and sexually assaulting women. Either that or there is a lesser number of men doing these things but are very active in doing it. Personally I would be shocked to learn that any of my male friends have ever done anything that would fall into the categories of rape or sexual assault. I would expect everyone I know to be the guys who are helping a drunk woman get home safely or stepping in when a woman looks like she needs any kind of help. I'm just wondering if the teaching might be more effective at reducing the events if it were targeted at some group that tends to more often be the perpetrators. Socially and politically touchy stuff but I wondering what the studies show on that (if anything).


Good thoughts Shoto.

The stats I've seen are 1 in 3 american women will experience some form of unwanted sexual molestation in their lives. "Unwanted sexual molestation" is a very broad range of behavior encompassing both stranger rape and copping a cheap feel as she walks by.

The biggest group of perpetrators are men. So we target men for awareness. Obviously, some men feel that this puts the burden on all men to defend themselves against a rapist characterization. And that is unfortunate. Would it help if I said I believe firmly that all the men participating in this thread are not at all perpetrators of unwanted sexual molestation? Probably not, though I wish it did. My husband is a man and I happen to know with certainty that he has never ever pushed himself onto a woman, and the times he has pushed himself onto me, it's been more than welcome! 

I think to grow understanding we must put away the finger of accusation as well as the hand of defense and ask ourselves how do we define consent, how do we communicate consent, and how do we teach these things to our children in a way that empowers them to be healthy and strong sexual beings?


----------



## Anon Pink

Pollo said:


> It's called reality. Do you think teaching people not to commit crimes is going to stop crimes? The whole sexism part of this argument is ridiculous.
> 
> Criminals will always exist no matter what you do, in this situation it's important to tell women how to avoid putting themselves in dangerous situations because those situations will always be there. *Stop trying to blame men, this is a crime problem, not a sexism problem*.


I'm not trying to blame men and NO, this is a LOT more than a crime problem. It IS a problem of sexism...I take it you didn't watch the TEDTalk? Perhaps you might want to start there?

For those of you insisting sexism has nothing to do with sexual assault, I challenge you to watch the TEDTalk linked earlier in this thread, then come back and let's discuss.


----------



## that.girl

We're focusing a lot here on the "hold her down and force her" type of rape, but it's a much broader issue than that.
When i was a teenager, i knew a girl who had been dating a guy for a month or so, and they had sex a handful of times. One night, she got drunk and passed out at his house. Not a wise move, but not the point. He had his way with her while she was out. When she found out, she felt she had been raped. He felt he had done nothing wrong, because she had always consented in the past, and probably would have said yes if she was awake. It wasn't until she got upset that he realized that might not have been a fair assumption. 
I'm not saying all teenage boys would do this, but i think we all know it happens. So maybe a better question to ask in this thread would be -
What do you teach your sons about getting consent?


----------



## Blossom Leigh

Anon Pink said:


> Good thoughts Shoto.
> 
> The stats I've seen are 1 in 3 american women will experience some form of unwanted sexual molestation in their lives. "Unwanted sexual molestation" is a very broad range of behavior encompassing both stranger rape and copping a cheap feel as she walks by.


I'm one of the three

Molested by neighborhood kid when I was 4
Molested by my brother
gropped just by walking down the hall at highschool by a football player, I turned around, got right in his face and threatened him and the whole team took a step back from him. Never bothered me again.

Date raped twice, before there was ever a name for it.


----------



## MaritimeGuy

tulsy said:


> So you taught him to put women on a pedestal.
> 
> I teach my kids to treat everyone equally, regardless of race or gender. Women are not deserving of greater respect than men; they deserve to be treated equally.
> 
> I don't believe it's right to teach your sons that women deserve to be treated better than men.


I agree with this. Asking men to treat women better than men somehow implies to me that woman are not equal and are deserving of special consideration. 

I believe and have hopefully passed on to my son that we treat everyone well. We don't just hold doors open for women we do it for men too. 

For example...I'm tall and have been asked on many occasions to reach for things on high shelves...often times by women who are shorter than me. I don't do it because they're woman. I do it because I'm taller and can do it easily rather than them having to seek out a step ladder or something. It's just common sense. 

I would never rape a man or woman because inherently I know it's wrong. No one has to tell me. 

I recall many (too many to admit) years ago as a teenager being at a house party and seeing a guy trying to make out with a passed out girl. I was incensed. I threw the guy up against the wall and told him if that's what he was into he should head to the morgue. I didn't particularly like that girl but common sense told me she didn't deserve to have that happen to her. It wasn't going to happen on my watch.


----------



## Fozzy

I think what Huggybear is saying is that the question presumes that boys default to the rape mentality, and that they need to be taught that rape is wrong, when in actuality most boys/men intrinsically know that rape is wrong and don't need to be taught.

The ones that don't understand it intrinsically need to be beaten/imprisoned until they do understand.


----------



## Anon Pink

Fozzy said:


> I think what Huggybear is saying is that the question presumes that boys default to the rape mentality, and that they need to be taught that rape is wrong, when in actuality most boys/men intrinsically know that rape is wrong and don't need to be taught.
> 
> The ones that don't understand it intrinsically need to be beaten/imprisoned until they do understand.


And I think we are forgetting that gripping a woman's behind as she is giving a speech is also a form of sexual molestation and something EVERY woman has suffered! Before you point out the 1 in 3 stats I posted above, find any woman here at TAM or in your real lives who hasn't been inappropriately and unwantingly groped. You can't do it!


----------



## Anonymous07

badsanta said:


> I think this question has to be asked "what do we tell our daughters to help protect them?" Since my daughter is a teenager, the wife and I have had some very serious conversations on the topic so she is not naive.
> 
> Growing up, I never got anything from my dad (he was always verbally abusive to my mom) as it mostly came from my peers and church on how to properly treat women.
> 
> Most important is the "presence" of the girl's father that a boy is dating, along with his gut reaction if a boy will be trusted to date his daughter. This often involves a moment alone a prospective boyfriend will have to endure with the girl's father before they he is allowed to date her. Odds are nothing sexual is discussed, but more of an overall assessment of character as well as a show of force such as him carrying the proverbial shotgun.
> 
> When I was in high school I dated this girl. Before we went out, I had to go take a ride with her dad so he could show me his muscle car along with his guns in the backseat. I remember being anxious and that I basically spoke with her dad on how cool his car was and the importance that I not ever drive a foreign made car. Not one word was spoken about how I should treat his daughter, but the guns in the backseat got that across.
> 
> I think there is a good episode of Duck Dynasty that demonstrates this where the dad takes the boyfriend hunting to judge his character before he can date his daughter.


This doesn't always work. 

My ex-boyfriend tried to rape me. He met my parents multiple times and my dad even had a talk with him(my dad is 6'1" and a big guy, too). My ex had us all fooled into thinking he was a nice guy(I had trusted him). I told him over and over again that horrible day that I did not want to have sex, but he didn't care. He had me pinned to his bed, trying to get my jeans off, as I screamed at him to let me go and I only got away from him because his brother came home earlier than expected. 

That's why the topic should not be on what the women should be doing(it's never the victim's fault!), but more so on what we can teach boys/men. I have a young son(almost a year and a half old), so we are far from sex talks, but I teach him now to be gentle and kind. When he gets older, we'll go over how to be respectful and be aware of boundaries. He will know that he has no entitlement to have sex with a girl and even if she says yes in the beginning, she can change her mind later on and he will respect that. If everyone tried their best to teach their children to be kind and respectful, instead of letting them do anything they want, we'd live in a much better world.


----------



## norajane

Anon Pink said:


> And I think we are forgetting that gripping a woman's behind as she is giving a speech is also a form of sexual molestation and something EVERY woman has suffered! Before you point out the 1 in 3 stats I posted above, *find any woman here at TAM or in your real lives who hasn't been inappropriately and unwantingly groped. You can't do it!*


:iagree:

It's happened many times to me, including one time in broad daylight on the street when I was walking home from the dentist. It wasn't my "going to the dentist" clothing that incited him to grab my breast as he walked past me. He just felt entitled to. Maybe he'll progress from groping women on the street to raping his gf in her home. Maybe he already had.

These rapists that we talk about? The guys who sexually assault women? Most of them are "regular guys" who hold their heads up at church, at work, at Little League. They aren't all some crazy psychos. They really are the college guys who grew up the same as your daughters, the guys in church who believe it when the Bible tells them their wives' bodies belong to them, wealthy guys, poor guys, guys with jobs giving their co-workers rides home, they're the star quarterback and the benchwarmers who think they're entitled to sex, etc. They aren't strangers. They weren't taught that touching women without their consent is wrong. They weren't taught that hurting women and taking what you want from them is wrong. Or maybe they just weren't listening.


----------



## Blossom Leigh

Anonymous07 said:


> This doesn't always work.
> 
> My ex-boyfriend tried to rape me. He met my parents multiple times and my dad even had a talk with him(my dad is 6'1" and a big guy, too). My ex had us all fooled into thinking he was a nice guy(I had trusted him). I told him over and over again that horrible day that I did not want to have sex, but he didn't care. He had me pinned to his bed, trying to get my jeans off, as I screamed at him to let me go and I only got away from him because his brother came home earlier than expected.
> 
> That's why the topic should not be on what the women should be doing(it's never the victim's fault!), but more so on what we can teach boys/men. I have a young son(almost a year and a half old), so we are far from sex talks, but I teach him now to be gentle and kind. When he gets older, we'll go over how to be respectful and be aware of boundaries. He will know that he has no entitlement to have sex with a girl and even if she says yes in the beginning, she can change her mind later on and he will respect that. If everyone tried their best to teach their children to be kind and respectful, instead of letting them do anything they want, we'd live in a much better world.


Ok... an one almost date rape now that I think about it. I was 14 years old and liked a boy who invited me to study with him at his house. I ended up fighting him off for two hours straight. I was SO glad to get home. omg


----------



## coffee4me

RandomDude said:


> I had planned to train my daughter at an early age in martial training however she has zero interest at present times  Pity, considering daddy has so much to pass on... *sigh*
> 
> I'll insist on it later however, I don't want to end up worrying non-stop once she comes of age - she's my only child! Bah! But instead of being my little warrior all she wants to be is my little princess -.-
> 
> It sucks!


RD my daughter started martial arts at 6. She's a dancer and princess, she did not enjoy it and for 2 years frankly she got her a$$ kicked but she wasn't allowed to quit. 

The training is not just in the body, it's in the mind. The mental training is what makes all the difference. Learning to stand up and stand tall and keep fighting even when she thought she was beat. It's empowering!!! And for the next 3 years she was no longer gettin her a$$ kicked, she was kickin a$$!!!! At 13 she nobody's victim never been bullied at school, stands up for those who are bullied. She knows how to manage fear and her fight instincts are exactly that, instinct because she was trained young. 

By the time your daughter comes of age it will be too late. Your daughter will have already developed much of her personality now is the time to teach her to stand up for herself. It will make a difference not just in defending herself but also empowers her to stand against peer pressure and the pressure that boys put on her.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SimplyAmorous said:


> your last line here makes me think of this T-shirt I put on this thread a while back...http://talkaboutmarriage.com/ladies-lounge/201042-feminist-father.html ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This was the T-shirt shown in the opening post (the link is now gone)...


^^ Love the second one.


----------



## jorgegene

that.girl said:


> Many of you say you teach by example. This works fine to teach respect, but not so well where sexuality is concerned.
> You can't show by example how to react when a woman says no. Or what to do when she says yes and changes her mind. Or what to do when your date is heavily intoxicated but says yes. You can't teach by example how to react when your date freezes up and doesn't say no or yes or anything at all.
> I don't think it's fair to expect a hormonal teenage boy to know intuitively how to deal with these adult situations. That's why they need to be discussed openly.


actually I beg to differ. I think when you are taught by example, and you are taught to treat women with high respect, everything else follows. No matter what the situation is, if you are ingrained with respectful views towards women, then you won't need to be instructed in minute specifics. it will just come natural.

but your point is still valid, in that ideally you are taught both ways. that is, you are taught by example AND you have man to man discussions with your son about how to react in specific situations.

my own Dad is a WWII gen. which means non verbal, stoic. uptight about sex.
so he taught me ONLY by example, but it was plenty good enough.


----------



## NobodySpecial

intheory said:


> *No-one should have to "convince" anyone to have sex with them.*
> 
> It should just happen: naturally and mutually.
> 
> That would be my advice to everyone; not just teenagers.


THIS. The culture of getting some vs sharing some is large IMO.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> I believe that women deserve equal rights.
> 
> But I don't agree with you above. Guess I am still old fashioned.
> 
> I teach my sons to Open doors for women.
> 
> I teach my sons to give up his seat on the bus if there is a woman standing in the aisle.
> 
> I teach my sons to help a woman if she is carrying something that looks heavy.
> 
> I think this is showing respect for women.


Interesting. I teach my children to open doors for people. To give up his or her sear on the bus if someone is standing. To help people carrying something that looks heavy. 

I don't have any big PROBLEM with what you are saying. Just have a little different take. Why would being kind and helpful be limited directed at females.


----------



## EleGirl

jorgegene said:


> actually I beg to differ. I think when you are taught by example, and you are taught to treat women with high respect, everything else follows. No matter what the situation is, if you are ingrained with respectful views towards women, then you won't need to be instructed in minute specifics. it will just come natural.
> 
> but your point is still valid, in that ideally you are taught both ways. that is, you are taught by example AND you have man to man discussions with your son about how to react in specific situations.
> 
> my own Dad is a WWII gen. which means non verbal, stoic. uptight about sex.
> so he taught me ONLY by example, but it was plenty good enough.


I agree that teaching my example can be a very strong way to teach.

Growing up, most of what we learns, boys and girls, was through example.


----------



## NobodySpecial

richie33 said:


> Hate the title of this thread. I understand the conversation and some good could come out of it but it gets under my skin.


I can understand why it would! Most people are good people. Most men don't rape women. Yet still there is something in our culture that causes it to continue to happen. I don't know the stats. El can probably help me out. But something like 2 in 3 women have been assaulted in their lives. I have been assaulted FOUR times. Only one successfully completely. Doesn't mean the other three didn't scare the pants off me.

Bear in mind the context you may not be aware of is 2 threads indicating that women are responsible for rape. 

I have wondered what made the basketball coach what he was. What made that boy we thought was a family friend what he was. What the made the room mate what he was. 

As a mother, I don't want to just teach my son not to rape. That is limiting the scope of the discussion to skip the positives. I want to teach my son AND daughter what sex is. What it is for. And what it is not. I think that teaching my children what a healthy sex life is is good for them. I want my son to have a fulfilling sex life with engaged and enthusiastic partner(s). I don't want my son to have the attitude that he is "getting it" off her. How much fun is that sex? Better than none? I don't really think so. Not long term.


----------



## NobodySpecial

MachoMcCoy said:


> Every year my issue is all of the pink in October, yet nobody knows what the color is for prostate cancer awareness, recently changed to "men's health awareness", or what month it is (powder blue, November). This year was even better. Not only did we ignore men's health awareness altogether, but we replaced it with "Men, stop being a$$holes" month. It was kicked off with that viral catcalls video and went right into the rape culture on college campuses.
> 
> That is my long winded way, Anon, of thanking you for at least waiting until the end of men's health awareness month before you jumped on the "men, stop being a$$holes" bandwagon. That means a lot to me.


Huh. I find myself cheerfully educated. I will keep my eyes out for prostate cancer and men's health awareness month. I am always on the lookout for causes that support equality in family courts. Thank you.


----------



## NobodySpecial

that.girl said:


> We're focusing a lot here on the "hold her down and force her" type of rape, but it's a much broader issue than that.
> When i was a teenager, i knew a girl who had been dating a guy for a month or so, and they had sex a handful of times. One night, she got drunk and passed out at his house. Not a wise move, but not the point. He had his way with her while she was out. When she found out, she felt she had been raped. He felt he had done nothing wrong, because she had always consented in the past, and probably would have said yes if she was awake. It wasn't until she got upset that he realized that might not have been a fair assumption.
> I'm not saying all teenage boys would do this, but i think we all know it happens. So maybe a better question to ask in this thread would be -
> What do you teach your sons about getting consent?


Ew. I teach my son that that is not sex. That is just gross.


----------



## T&T

ConanHub said:


> I think teaching our boys to be brave and take a stand against"group" thinking or any form of evil is helpful.
> 
> My youngest son is absolutely fearless when confrontation is needed.


:iagree: This is how we raised our boys and girls and none of them will take sh!t from anybody. 

If they have a problem that can't be solved on their own, they come forward and the rest of the family will help them solve it.


----------



## NobodySpecial

I do think that boys need to be taught within the confines of being boys. I think schools have been kind of girlafied. Sit still. Pay attention. Behave NICE. I would love it if there was more opportunity for active learning. That is why I posted the Wonder of Boys book above. How do we love, encourage, develop the goodness of boys? There is nothing wrong with aggression. Aggression needn't be violence. Aggression can be channeled to good things. There is a sense on this board that feminism is an attack on maleness. I don't see that in my community. I see the feminists more likely to stand up for equality in family courts, for instance. But I can understand how men can feel this way.

I believe we need a peopleism. I DO believe that feminism is still needed to push the understanding that we are not objects. Our sexuality is not owned by men. Because too many men still feel that it is. But our best foot will be put forward when we realize that men are our allies in this fight. And we should be allies in theirs.

[Edit]
Confines is the wrong word. Maleness is not confining. Boy need to be taught with an understanding and acceptance that being a male is a wonderful thing. An understanding of what that entails.


----------



## Healer

If you have sons you have to teach NOT to rape, you have problems.


----------



## tulsy

SadSamIAm said:


> I believe that women deserve equal rights.
> 
> But I don't agree with you above. Guess I am still old fashioned.
> 
> I teach my sons to Open doors for women.
> 
> I teach my sons to give up his seat on the bus if there is a woman standing in the aisle.
> 
> I teach my sons to help a woman if she is carrying something that looks heavy.
> 
> I think this is showing respect for women.


Since you disagree, you don't agree that women should be treated as equal? 

I teach my sons to hold the door open for everyone, not just women.
If an old man is standing on the bus, I'd give up my seat...even though he doesn't have a vagina.
If someone is struggling with something heavy, I'd lend a hand, regardless of their genitalia.

I certainly wouldn't teach my kids that women are more deserving of respect than men are. That's really not something I want to program my sons to believe. 

I believe in equality. Treat everyone how you would like to be treated. That's it. That's what I teach my kids.

FWIW,
I never had to be taught not to rape anyone, even though I have a penis. 

Does anyone actually think boys need to be taught not to rape?? I think assuming that all boys need to be taught not to rape is assuming all boys are capable of rape simply because they are born with the equipment. I believe that most men ARE NOT capable of raping someone because there's nothing about that scenario which could possibly cause them to maintain an erection. 

I don't believe that all men, or even the majority of men possess the ability to rape another person. Rape is a violent crime...not all men are capable of such an horrible act.


----------



## ConanHub

norajane said:


> :iagree:
> 
> It's happened many times to me, including one time in broad daylight on the street when I was walking home from the dentist. It wasn't my "going to the dentist" clothing that incited him to grab my breast as he walked past me. He just felt entitled to. Maybe he'll progress from groping women on the street to raping his gf in her home. Maybe he already had.
> 
> These rapists that we talk about? The guys who sexually assault women? Most of them are "regular guys" who hold their heads up at church, at work, at Little League. They aren't all some crazy psychos. They really are the college guys who grew up the same as your daughters, the guys in church who believe it when the Bible tells them their wives' bodies belong to them, wealthy guys, poor guys, guys with jobs giving their co-workers rides home, they're the star quarterback and the benchwarmers who think they're entitled to sex, etc. They aren't strangers. They weren't taught that touching women without their consent is wrong. They weren't taught that hurting women and taking what you want from them is wrong. Or maybe they just weren't listening.


Maybe they were just never stopped so they kept doing it. It takes perseverance and conviction to stop one of these guys. They continue if not stopped.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Buddy400

Anon Pink said:


> So what do you parents of sons teach, explain and show your sons about the difference between trying to convince her to have sex with you and coercing her?


Well, I haven't explicitly told them not to rape women; I kind of assumed that was understood as being something that only reprehensible criminals do. I also haven't specifically told them not to commit murder, assault children or beat small defenseless animals to death. 

So far, thankfully, they haven't raped anyone or clubbed any baby seals to death (that I know of). But they're only in their early twenties; there's a chance they could still act like typical men.


----------



## Anonymous07

RandomDude said:


> I had planned to train my daughter at an early age in martial training however she has zero interest at present times  Pity, considering daddy has so much to pass on... *sigh*
> 
> I'll insist on it later however, I don't want to end up worrying non-stop once she comes of age - she's my only child! Bah! But instead of being my little warrior all she wants to be is my little princess -.-
> 
> It sucks!


I wouldn't force her to do martial arts if she doesn't want to, as there are other things she can do to help her feel more confident. Maybe sign her up for a self-defense class or boxing/kick boxing class? For now, just let her be a little girl. 

My friends and I took a self-defense class in college after the attempted rape from my ex and I loved that class. It taught a lot of real life scenarios that people can be in and how to get out of them(ex: ways to get out of a head lock). I wish I had learned that stuff sooner.


----------



## norajane

Healer said:


> If you have sons you have to teach NOT to rape, you have problems.


With 1 out of 5 college girls being raped or sexually assaulted, _somebody _has sons - whom they are sending to college - who apparently DO need to be taught not to rape and otherwise sexually assault women.


----------



## Buddy400

Anon Pink said:


> And I think we are forgetting that gripping a woman's behind as she is giving a speech is also a form of sexual molestation and something EVERY woman has suffered! Before you point out the 1 in 3 stats I posted above, find any woman here at TAM or in your real lives who hasn't been inappropriately and unwantingly groped. You can't do it!


Why, exactly, does "unwanted groping" need to be in the same category as "rape"? Surely, while both are bad, there is a difference in degree?


----------



## tacoma

Anon Pink said:


> According to popular opinion, women need to learn to protect themselves from men who might be rapists. You know, other than general safety stuff, how is a woman supposed to know if a man is a friendly guy or if he is isolating her to overpower and rape her? Is the coach being nice offering her a ride home or is he kidnapping her? Was the hand on my ass a result of the subway car momentum or did that guy just cop a cheap feel? Impossible!
> 
> So what do you parents of sons teach, explain and show your sons about the difference between trying to convince her to have sex with you and coercing her? How many of you have actually told your sons not to cop a cheap feel even if she is passed out? How many of you have actually explained the difference between taking the lead in sexual play and just plain taking?
> 
> What do you tell your sons?


I refuse to teach my sons "Not to rape"

The insinuation disgusts me as does the college level SJW's who promote this crap.

Teach your children about personal boundaries and respect for human life and volition and they cannot mistake that rape is wrong when compared in that context.

Do you specifically teach your sons not to murder?
Do you teach them specifically not to embezzle?


----------



## unbelievable

Decent human beings don't commit rape just like they don't commit murder or steal cars. Rather than specifically instruct a young NOT to do every possible act of evil, I believe it's more helpful to teach them what they should be and, more importantly, to give them living examples of consistently right conduct. If told my kid to treat women with respect but he found my secret porn stash, he'd be getting two conflicting messages. He'd believe the porn stash. If I told him to treat women with respect but I dog cussed his mother, occasionally hit her, or ran around on her, he'd believe my personal example and whatever I had told him would mean nothing.


----------



## BrockLanders

This is an ingenius idea. While we're at it we should teach our sons to never murder, steal or lie too! In a few years we'll all be living in utopia!


----------



## EleGirl

norajane said:


> With 1 out of 5 college girls being raped or sexually assaulted, _somebody _has sons - whom they are sending to college - who apparently DO need to be taught not to rape and otherwise sexually assault women.


1 in 5 college girls report that they have been raped/sexually-assaulted at some time in their lives. This does not mean that 1 in 5 are raped while in college.


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous07 said:


> That's why the topic should not be on what the women should be doing(it's never the victim's fault!), but more so on what we can teach boys/men.


No, it will always need to be both.

Don't mistake teaching a boy about respect for a woman with a boy eventually treating women with respect. You have to be prepared to deal with both kinds of failure.


----------



## EleGirl

BrockLanders said:


> This is an ingenius idea. While we're at it we should teach our sons to never murder, steal or lie too! In a few years we'll all be living in utopia!


We do teach our children all of those things. And because we teach them, most of them don't murder, steal or lie. Same for rape.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> No, it will always need to be both.
> 
> Don't mistake teaching a boy about respect for a woman with a boy eventually treating women with respect. You have to be prepared to deal with both kinds of failure.


I agree with you. Girls/women have to be taught to be careful. And boy/men need to be taught that sexual assault/rape is not ok.


----------



## Cletus

tulsy said:


> I believe in equality. Treat everyone how you would like to be treated. That's it. That's what I teach my kids.


I taught the platinum rule - treat everyone how they would like to be treated. And the wiccan creed - "An it harm no one, do as ye will".

If I treated a woman the way I want to be treated, I'd be in jail for rape.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Buddy400 said:


> Why, exactly, does "unwanted groping" need to be in the same category as "rape"? Surely, while both are bad, there is a difference in degree?


Clearly there is a difference in degree. The thing that I struggle with is how to change the dialog. How to allow girls to own their sexuality. Be part of a partnership of sexuality given our cultural history. It helps everyone. What man does not love boobies and a bit of vajayjay? How do we change from a culture that didn't work to one that does? And part of that conversation has to include why do people feel that they have the right, or event want, to stick a finger in a pantyhose clad woman on the subway (experience mine). What makes that interesting or desirable? I sure as heck don't get it.


----------



## EleGirl

I think that this thread is mistitled. It's not that every boy will grow up to be a rapist if he is not explicitly told "DO NOT RAPE". It's that in our culture that are things that are done pretty normally that will actually encourage a guy with weak self control to think that rape is ok. We need to teach our boys to not engage in these things... 

One of them is rape jokes... 



I've heard a lot of men tell rape jokes. Some men's groups have fought for the right of men to post rape jokes on facebook.

A group called “A Voice for Men” posted this in response to people asking Facebook to ban rape jokes.



> “Hey Facebook, Gearing up a campaign to go after sexism against only one sex isn’t fighting sexism. It’s practicing it. STOP BASHING MEN”


So asking that rape jokes not be allowed is “bashing men”? Really?



> “generally silly male teen humor. Moreover, these “jokes” aren’t directed towards anyone specific and smack of the kind of insider references in which teenage groups often traffic. Does that kind of thing really deserve such outrage?”


Here are some examples of ‘jokes’.

*“Win her over with Chloroform. They way real men get the girl.”

“1/3 of women are physically abused. 2/3 of men aren’t doing their job.”

“You know she’s playing hard to get when your [sic] chasing her down an alleyway,”*

While most boys/men would not be spurred on to rape abased on these kinds no not funny ‘jokes’, their telling sets up the idea that rape is humorous and women are laughable. There will always be some weak minded boy/man who interprets these ‘jokes’ as a heads up to that treating women this way is just find. Wink wink.

One of the things that men can do it so tell anyone who makes these kinds of jokes that they are not funny or appreciated.

Men's rights activists fight for their freedom to make rape jokes on Facebook


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> I taught the platinum rule - treat everyone how they would like to be treated. And the wiccan creed - "An it harm no one, do as ye will".
> 
> If I treated a woman the way I want to be treated, I'd be in jail for rape.


Really? You want women to attack you, choke you and hold you down while she hurts you?


----------



## that.girl

Buddy400 said:


> Why, exactly, does "unwanted groping" need to be in the same category as "rape"? Surely, while both are bad, there is a difference in degree?


There is definitely a difference in degree. But the fact that it is a smaller crime does not make it more acceptable. It's still not acceptable. And for the record, both groping and rape are classified as sexual assault.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> If I treated a woman the way I want to be treated, I'd be in jail for rape.


Wow. Ok. Rape attempt one. Being pulled by my hair in an attempt to get me into the back of the car. Rape attempt number 2 getting punched in the face. Successful rape involved depriving me of oxygen so that I would not struggle.

This is exactly the attitude that I seek to combat. That rape is in any way related to a healthy sex life. Joke on DB.


----------



## Anonymous07

Cletus said:


> No, it will always need to be both.
> 
> Don't mistake teaching a boy about respect for a woman with a boy eventually treating women with respect. You have to be prepared to deal with both kinds of failure.


Yes, it does need to be both. We already teach girls/women from a very young age exactly what to do to avoid being a target(buddy system, don't be in certain areas, watch your drink, etc.), but we don't teach our boys/men about this topic. For the longest time, the focus has always been on women and what they should do to avoid rape. The focus needs to switch to look at ways to teach boys/men to not rape.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Anonymous07 said:


> Yes, it does need to be both. We already teach girls/women from a very young age exactly what to do to avoid being a target(buddy system, don't be in certain areas, watch your drink, etc.), but we don't teach our boys/men about this topic. For the longest time, the focus has always been on women and what they should do to avoid rape. *The focus needs to switch* to look at ways to teach boys/men to not rape.


I can't say I agree with this. I think the focus should be on how to craft a culture of healthy sex. Healthy male and female relationship and mutual understanding and acceptance. If that is achieved, then why would anyone need or want to rape anyone?


----------



## Shoto1984

Anon Pink said:


> I think to grow understanding we must put away the finger of accusation as well as the hand of defense and ask ourselves how do we define consent, how do we communicate consent, and how do we teach these things to our children in a way that empowers them to be healthy and strong sexual beings?


So when women have grabbed my back side I was being sexually assaulted in that I hadn't given consent. I never thought of myself as a victim but wrong is wrong. Hmmmm.
So yes the biggest group of perpetrators are men but not all men and I'm thinking actually a minority of men at that. So I'm still thinking we need some data the give us common characteristics of men who are likely to be perpetrators and then somehow target the teaching. Kind of heading toward a "Minority Report" scenario but without the preemptive arrest  
The consent thing is so tough. I heard a recent discussion where a college prof was saying that the definite consent idea falls apart as soon as you have consensual relations absent the definite consent. No harm no fowl but legally you're still a criminal. Difficult.


----------



## BrockLanders

Stopping rape by asking rapists not to rape. What could go wrong?


----------



## NobodySpecial

Do people read the threads?


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Anon Pink said:


> Take away points from that TEDTalk..
> 
> 
> And so I ask again, if it MEN doing the raping, why do we spend so much time teaching our daughters not to get raped when we should be teaching our sons Not To Rape?


It's a two sided issue and both sides have been stated.

You see a lot of 'teach our sons to be good men'. That is step 1 in this issue. Raise our sons to be men who respect women. Who, when a woman says no..they stop...or EVEN BETTER such as what I'm teaching my sons...get a "yes I want to". 

Now (step 2) I'm also teaching my daughter to not get raped because let's be honest....Not every parent is successful in step 1. 

You need to address both sides of the equation.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Shoto1984 said:


> So when women have grabbed my back side I was being sexually assaulted in that I hadn't given consent. I never thought of myself as a victim but wrong is wrong. Hmmmm.
> So yes the biggest group of perpetrators are men but not all men and I'm thinking actually a minority of men at that. So I'm still thinking we need some data the give us common characteristics of men who are likely to be perpetrators and then somehow target the teaching. Kind of heading toward a "Minority Report" scenario but without the preemptive arrest
> The consent thing is so tough. I heard a recent discussion where a college prof was saying that the definite consent idea falls apart as soon as you have consensual relations absent the definite consent. No harm no fowl but legally you're still a criminal. Difficult.


Anecdotal and for that I don't know how useful.

Basketball coach. Respected in the community. Engaged to be married. Had his dismissal been public, community would have been baffled.

Neighborhood teen. Me preteen. Good family. Elder brother was a police officer. 

Friend's boyfriend. Normal guy. Nearly killed me.

Consent is not difficult. I have done it countless times. There was no ambiguity. If there is ambiguity, then there is no consent. Why would anyone even want that?


----------



## NobodySpecial

Dad&Hubby said:


> It's a two sided issue and both sides have been stated.
> 
> You see a lot of 'teach our sons to be good men'. That is step 1 in this issue. Raise our sons to be men who respect women. Who, when a woman says no..they stop...or EVEN BETTER such as what I'm teaching my sons...get a "yes I want to".
> 
> Now (step 2) I'm also teaching my daughter to not get raped because let's be honest....Not every parent is successful in step 1.
> 
> You need to address both sides of the equation.


Sure we have to teach our daughters. But I reject that people who want to raise good men will fail. I spoke to my 13 year old about a recent case. He was sincerely amazed. He asked me why anyone would even want that.


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> Interesting. I teach my children to open doors for people. To give up his or her sear on the bus if someone is standing. To help people carrying something that looks heavy.
> 
> I don't have any big PROBLEM with what you are saying. Just have a little different take. Why would being kind and helpful be limited directed at females.


No real reason other than that is the way I was brought up.

If I am walking with a guy and we come up to a door, whoever gets there first opens it. If I am walking with a woman, then I make sure I get there first to open it for her. If I am on a bus and have a seat and someone is standing, I offer it to them if they are a woman or an older gentleman. 

When I take my wife out for supper, and we are walking back to our car afterwards, I go to her side and open the door for her and shut it once she is inside. I have done this for the last 30 years and I will do it for the next 30 as well.


----------



## SadSamIAm

tulsy said:


> Since you disagree, you don't agree that women should be treated as equal?


I guess I treat them as more than equal.



> I teach my sons to hold the door open for everyone, not just women.


I teach mine to hold doors for everyone as well. But I teach them that if they are with a woman, they make sure they are there first to hold the door open for her.



> If an old man is standing on the bus, I'd give up my seat...even though he doesn't have a vagina.


I teach mine to respect the elderly as well. But I also expect them to give up there seat to anyone with a vagina that is older than they are.



> If someone is struggling with something heavy, I'd lend a hand, regardless of their genitalia.


I teach mine to help everyone if they are struggling with anything. But if someone could use a hand and he notices that their genitalia includes a vagina, then he should offer to help.



> I certainly wouldn't teach my kids that women are more deserving of respect than men are. That's really not something I want to program my sons to believe.
> 
> I believe in equality. Treat everyone how you would like to be treated. That's it. That's what I teach my kids.



Each to their own. I teach my children to treat everyone as good as possible and to be even better to people with vaginas. 

PS. Hope you like my use of the words vagina and genitalia since you seem to favor them.


----------



## BrockLanders

NobodySpecial said:


> Do people read the threads?


Yeah, I read it. It's pretty patronizing at best. No one has to sit a kid down and have a discussion on how it's bad to murder or steal because people know it. The same goes for rape.

The part about rape jokes, if you don't like them then don't listen to comics who make them. Plenty of jokes involve murder, stealing, etc. Those subjects aren't taboo.


----------



## NobodySpecial

^^ Yet perfectly normal people still do it. How do you explain that?


----------



## unbelievable

As long as we're on the topic of rape and child instruction, it might be handy to point out that a great many rape and sexual assault allegations turn out to be complete fabrications. After we teach Junior to not commit rapes, we need to turn to our daughters and teach them to not make false rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment reports, or deliberately false pregnancy claims. Males don't have a monopoly on evil behavior.


----------



## NobodySpecial

unbelievable said:


> As long as we're on the topic of rape and child instruction, it might be handy to point out that a great many rape and sexual assault allegations turn out to be complete fabrications. After we teach Junior to not commit rapes, we need to turn to our daughters and teach them to not make false rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment reports, or deliberately false pregnancy claims. Males don't have a monopoly on evil behavior.


Yup. Part of that is allowing for females to own and engage in their sexuality. No one is asserting males have a monopoly on bad behavior.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> Really? You want women to attack you, choke you and hold you down while she hurts you?


Maybe just a little?

Ok, ok, I know, you don't have a sense of humor regarding this issue. 

This may be hard for a woman to understand, but the idea of having a woman sexually force herself on you is not as distasteful for men in general as it is for women. I'm sorry, but that's just the reality of the situation. What a good many men fantasize about you would call rape. What you would call rape, a good number of men would call a fun night out. Why do you think rapists are almost exclusively male?

I well and truly understand that this notion does not cross the gender barrier with too much regularity (although rape fantasies are common), so I don't expect women to want me to behave this way.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Call rape. Ok I am done.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anon Pink said:


> Take away points from that TEDTalk..
> 
> 
> And so I ask again, if it MEN doing the raping, why do we spend so much time teaching our daughters not to get raped when we should be teaching our sons Not To Rape?


I generally find this question a set up. A phrasing that purposefully makes it seem as if society is sexist in advising girls how to avoid being victim of a crime.

However, this is really no different than any other crime. Why don't we teach murderers not to murder? Why don't we teach thieves not to steal? etc etc. The truth of course, is that all these things ARE generally taught. We are all taught to not take what is not ours. To not use force except in self-defense. We shame and disdain liars. 

That we teach these things does not mean all will adhere to them. There will always be sociopathic people who can't see other people as anything more than cardboard cutouts to be used as needed.

That we teach girls how to avoid being raped, is an acknowledgement of reality: you will never get through to everyone. Bad people exist. Always have, always will.

Teaching girls this isn't some sexist interest in placing responsibility on girls. It's no different than advising someone how to avoid being mugged. In the end, the person with the most responsibility for you, is you. There are bad people in the world.

So similarly, I'll be teaching my son how to protect himself from false rape allegations.


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> Huh. I find myself cheerfully educated. I will keep my eyes out for prostate cancer and men's health awareness month. I am always on the lookout for causes that support equality in family courts. Thank you.


Now if we could only get breast cancer and prostate cancer awareness to make a dent in mortality, we'd be on to something.


----------



## BrockLanders

NobodySpecial said:


> ^^ Yet perfectly normal people still do it. How do you explain that?


Poor impulse control, alcohol, bad apple, any combination of reasons. Good people steal and kill too, no amount of education is going to stop them.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I generally find this question a set up. A phrasing that purposefully makes it seem as if society is sexist in advising girls how to avoid being victim of a crime.
> 
> However, this is really no different than any other crime. Why don't we teach murderers not to murder? Why don't we teach thieves not to steal? etc etc. The truth of course, is that all these things ARE generally taught. We are all taught to not take what is not ours. To not use force except in self-defense. We shame and disdain liars.


I believe we teach differently about these crimes. When it comes to getting into women's pants, there is a cultural yah but.


----------



## NobodySpecial

BrockLanders said:


> Poor impulse control, alcohol, bad apple, any combination of reasons. Good people steal and kill too, no amount of education is going to stop them.


So let's not even bother thinking about it! Woot! **** it. We're all going to hell in a hand basket. Let's enjoy the ride.


----------



## Anon Pink

Hey! I'm impressed! We got to 128 posts before "false reporting" was brought up. The trends suggest things are going in the right direction.

Okay now, men are kind of angry about feeling they've been painted with a broad brush regarding rape. And I can't blame them actually. 

Women are disgusted that men dont seem to get the whole rape culture picture in general.

It seems like we are all talking over one another heads.

I thought Cletus's joke was funny. He clearly wasn't talking about being beaten up, nor suffocated. he was talking about being over powered and used sexually, something he finds erotic. Lots of men would find that erotic. Lots of women would also find that erotic, with the right person under the right circumstances. So do we really need to brow beat Cletus about his joke? or do we need to understand where his thoughts were and what he meant by that, instead of assuming he was suggesting that women just "lie back and try to enjoy the inevitable." Bonus points to the person who can identify that politician who said that...and got ousted for that.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> Maybe just a little?
> 
> Ok, ok, I know, you don't have a sense of humor regarding this issue.
> 
> This may be hard for a woman to understand, but the idea of having a woman sexually force herself on you is not as distasteful for men in general as it is for women. I'm sorry, but that's just the reality of the situation. What a good many men fantasize about you would call rape. What you would call rape, a good number of men would call a fun night out. Why do you think rapists are almost exclusively male?


Here is a tip for you, Buckwheat. If you want it, it isn't rape.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Anon, did you delete your post?


----------



## norajane

Cletus said:


> Maybe just a little?
> 
> Ok, ok, I know, you don't have a sense of humor regarding this issue.
> 
> This may be hard for a woman to understand, but the idea of having a woman sexually force herself on you is not as distasteful for men in general as it is for women. I'm sorry, but that's just the reality of the situation. What a good many men fantasize about you would call rape. What you would call rape, a good number of men would call a fun night out. Why do you think rapists are almost exclusively male?
> 
> I well and truly understand that this notion does not cross the gender barrier with too much regularity (although rape fantasies are common), so I don't expect women to want me to behave this way.


This is exactly why we need to teach boys not to rape. They don't think what they're doing is rape.


----------



## Anonymous07

NobodySpecial said:


> I can't say I agree with this. I think the focus should be on how to craft a culture of healthy sex. Healthy male and female relationship and mutual understanding and acceptance. If that is achieved, then why would anyone need or want to rape anyone?


Ok, so it was worded poorly. The point I was making was that the focus should not solely be on women for preventing rape(don't dress this way, don't drink, don't walk alone, etc.). It needs to be men who step up as well to say this needs to stop(No actually means no). In a perfect world, maybe we could have what you stated, but I'm talking about things that can happen more so today.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Anon Pink said:


> Hey! I'm impressed! We got to 128 posts before "false reporting" was brought up. The trends suggest things are going in the right direction.
> 
> Okay now, men are kind of angry about feeling they've been painted with a broad brush regarding rape. And I can't blame them actually.
> 
> Women are disgusted that men dont seem to get the whole rape culture picture in general.
> 
> It seems like we are all talking over one another heads.
> 
> I thought Cletus's joke was funny. He clearly wasn't talking about being beaten up, nor suffocated. he was talking about being over powered and used sexually, something he finds erotic. Lots of men would find that erotic. Lots of women would also find that erotic, with the right person under the right circumstances. So do we really need to brow beat Cletus about his joke? or do we need to understand where his thoughts were and what he meant by that, instead of assuming he was suggesting that women just "lie back and try to enjoy the inevitable." Bonus points to the person who can identify that politician who said that...and got ousted for that.


I guess I think we do a little. This conversation is about rape. His "joke" was about sex. They are not the same thing. And I think he spoke directly to the attitude that perpetuates that healthy sex includes any kind of rape. Hell I love rough sex.


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> Here is a tip for you, Buckwheat. If you want it, it isn't rape.


Thanks for the newsflash, I get that.

That's part of why it's harder in general to rape a man than a woman. There are fewer unwanted behaviors. 

If a strange woman were to grab my ass on the street, I wouldn't consider it sexual assault. That takes nothing away from your right to think otherwise, from my obligation to follow your wishes, or my need to teach my son how YOU feel about it - which was my point all along.


----------



## Cletus

norajane said:


> This is exactly why we need to teach boys not to rape. They don't think what they're doing is rape.


I completely agree, and never said otherwise.


----------



## Anonymous07

Cletus said:


> Now if we could only get breast cancer and prostate cancer awareness to make a dent in mortality, we'd be on to something.


Um, it has made a dent. The awareness from these campaigns has led to earlier detection, which means getting treatment earlier and higher survival rates. Look up the stats on it.


----------



## Faithful Wife

It's easy to make the comparison you are trying to make, Cletus. All you have to do is imagine being raped by a man who is larger and stronger than you are. Still turned on?


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous07 said:


> Um, it has made a dent. The awareness from these campaigns has led to earlier detection, which means getting treatment earlier and higher survival rates. Look up the stats on it.


The Case Against Early Cancer Detection | FiveThirtyEight


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> I believe we teach differently about these crimes. When it comes to getting into women's pants, there is a cultural yah but.


And there should be a cultural "yah but" as long as there are girls who claim rape inappropriately. Just because she decided to do something stupid and is suffering a social backlash she wants to offload responsibility for, doesn't make him a rapist.

Like the whole "he pressured me into it" thing and various wishy washy definitions of rape I've heard. They're bullsh*t. If you don't want to, DON'T DO IT.

I cannot abide by any concept of rape that does not involve her defending herself or being drugged. If I go and hand someone the keys to my car and they take it with no explicit effort on my part to keep it, have they stolen my car or have I given it to them? Maybe I let him steal my car because I was pressured.  Dumb. Raise girls to have more self-confidence so the only rape is that which happens by actual violent force.


----------



## MaritimeGuy

I agree with a much earlier post that discussions about what constitutes consent is a more valid discussion. 

Anyone capable of engaging in sex with an unwilling partner by use of force is not going to be deterred by any amount of discussion.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Faithful Wife said:


> It's easy to make the comparison you are trying to make, Cletus. All you have to do is imagine being raped by a man who is larger and stronger than you are. Still turned on?


Per his reasoning, a bi-sexual man would have no problem with this.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> Now if we could only get breast cancer and prostate cancer awareness to make a dent in mortality, we'd be on to something.


I read morality and was like... huh? Thank goodness that I read it again!


----------



## Dad&Hubby

NobodySpecial said:


> Sure we have to teach our daughters. But I reject that people who want to raise good men will fail. I spoke to my 13 year old about a recent case. He was sincerely amazed. He asked me why anyone would even want that.


You reject that people who want to raise good men will fail?

Seriously?!?!

You don't think there are parents who TRY hard to raise good men but we end up with problem members of our society?

You really think that there are men in prison who weren't raised by 2 caring parents who now look at their son with disappointment in how they turned out?

I'm not saying anything about the "majority will fail" or even "a decent percent will fail"...but SOME will fail. 

I always think about the Carlos Mencia skit where the mom put him and 3 siblings on one side and his other siblings on the other. And them mom said to him and his 3 siblings.. I pray you 4...go out in society and succeed...apply everything you have and become something great. Then she looked at the others now you also need to pray that those four will go out in society and become something great.


----------



## EleGirl

Shoto1984 said:


> So when women have grabbed my back side I was being sexually assaulted in that I hadn't given consent. I never thought of myself as a victim but wrong is wrong. Hmmmm.


Whose talking about backsides?

How would you react to a man groping your daughter... grabbing her boobs or her crotch almost every time she got on a crowded bus? Are you ok with this? 

How about a guy groping your wife's boobs and crotch... I guess you are ok with that?

Are you ok if you go somewhere with your daughter and your wife and a man does these things to them right there in front of you?


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> It's easy to make the comparison you are trying to make, Cletus. All you have to do is imagine being raped by a man who is larger and stronger than you are. Still turned on?


I'm not going down as the poster boy apologist for rape, because that is not my position. My god, people, you understand that you're beating up on someone so concerned about respecting a woman's sexual boundaries that he let his white-as-the-driven-snow vanilla wife control every single aspect of his sexual life for over a quarter of a century? That I have an ex-girlfriend who WAS raped who told me our positive and mutually respectful sexual history prior to her tragedy helped her overcome the anguish of the event? 

Apparently this is a third-rail TAM topic.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

We should not lock our doors. We should teach people better not to steal. smh.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Dad&Hubby said:


> You reject that people who want to raise good men will fail?
> 
> Seriously?!?!
> 
> You don't think there are parents who TRY hard to raise good men but we end up with problem members of our society?
> 
> You really think that there are men in prison who weren't raised by 2 caring parents who now look at their son with disappointment in how they turned out?


Ok that is fair. But it is not an excuse not to try which is what I was reading of that post.


----------



## Anon Pink

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> *I cannot abide by any concept of rape that does not involve her defending herself or being drugged.* If I go and hand someone the keys to my car and they take it with no explicit effort on my part to keep it, have they stolen my car or have I given it to them? Maybe I let him steal my car because I was pressured.  Dumb. Raise girls to have more self-confidence so the only rape is that which happens by actual violent force.


So, you subscribe to the old, "no blood no foul" thing?

Step right up ladies and gents, we have the real deal of ignorance here! 50 cents a piece please, no pushing there Ma'am....


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> I'm not going down as the poster boy apologist for rape, because that is not my position. My god, people, you understand that you're beating up on someone so concerned about respecting a woman's sexual boundaries that he let his white-as-the-driven-snow vanilla wife control every single aspect of his sexual life for over a quarter of a century?


No, honestly I had no idea. How would you assume that the people you are joking about rape to would know that? People who were raped violently? 



> That I have an ex-girlfriend who WAS raped who told me our positive and mutually respectful sexual history prior to her tragedy helped her overcome the anguish of the event?
> 
> Apparently this is a third-rail TAM topic.


Can you explain to me the relationship between sexual fantasy, which you were apparently referring to and forcible rape? Because I am honestly confused.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> Whose talking about backsides?
> 
> How would you react to a man groping your daughter... grabbing her boobs or her crotch almost every time she got on a crowded bus? Are you ok with this?
> 
> How about a guy groping your wife's boobs and crotch... I guess you are ok with that?
> 
> Are you ok if you go somewhere with your daughter and your wife and a man does these things to them right there in front of you?


There's a nice little double standard there I think. I've been groped by women totally inappropriately. A handful of @ss, my inner thigh, even my crotch. I didn't think of them as sexual assaults but surely a female would have.

And similarly, I'd probably react negatively to a boy groping my daughter. Yet my son getting groped would probably only make me laugh.

That's just the way it is.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Did my point make you feel beat up? 

Because your joke could make some rape victims feel beat up too.

Do you not see why it is insensitive to trivialize? Because it really is insensitive for the exact reason I quoted. You and every other man are at risk of being violently raped by another man. And thinking about it actually happening isn't very pleasant right? Neither is it pleasant for women to think about similar jokes. 

Your joke was insensitive. But that doesn't mean I think you endorse rape so I don't get why you are being so sensitive now. We are getting on you about the joke because it really does matter what we say and how we say it.


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> Can you explain to me the relationship between sexual fantasy, which you were apparently referring to and forcible rape? Because I am honestly confused.


All I meant to imply was that men and women have, _in general_, very different ideas about what actually constitutes rape. Having an attractive, aggressive stranger "force" herself on you is something most men aspire to at least at some point in their life. Of course, it isn't rape, because it's desired, but I think I'm safe in saying that more women than men don't want this and would consider the event a rape. 

The comment was in the context of the difference between the Golden rule and the Platinum rule - treating others as you would like to be treated (you say rape/I say fun), or treating others as they would like to be treated (you say rape, and I agree with your definition).


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> There's a nice little double standard there I think. I've been groped by women totally inappropriately. A handful of @ss, my inner thigh, even my crotch. I didn't think of them as sexual assaults but surely a female would have.
> 
> And similarly, I'd probably react negatively to a boy groping my daughter. Yet my son getting groped would probably only make me laugh.
> 
> That's just the way it is.


I don't buy that's just the way it is. That's just lazy non think. I don't chose to be that way.


----------



## unbelievable

norajane said:


> This is exactly why we need to teach boys not to rape. They don't think what they're doing is rape.


I've investigated a whole bunch of these and locked up a whole bunch of rapists. I haven't arrested even one EVER who was completely clueless and thought his behavior was ok. Some might have been surprised to learn it was major felony bad but, every one of them knew they were doing something wrong. They take measures to conceal their actions, they sometimes call their victim after the event to apologize or to urge her or threaten her into not making a report. These aren't the acts of people who just don't understand the wrongness of their actions. 

Just as an aside, while I have never groped a woman against her will nor grabbed or patted some strange woman's butt, I actually have had more than a few women I didn't even know do both to me and I'm nothing special to look at. Can't honestly say I was particularly horrified by the experiences, but I could understand how another guy might have felt violated under the same circumstances. It'd be hard for me to imagine how a woman might actually rape me, but sexual assaults and sexual harassment do occur both ways.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> Did my point make you feel beat up?
> 
> Because your joke could make some rape victims feel beat up too.


Except I wasn't making a joke. 

Our personal definitions of what constitute rape are very, very different. Ok, maybe not _your_ definition, but in general.

And yes, *that* was a joke based on our rather long history.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> All I meant to imply was that men and women have, _in general_, very different ideas about what actually constitutes rape. Having an attractive, aggressive stranger "force" herself on you is something most men aspire to at least at some point in their life. Of course, it isn't rape, because it's desired, but I think I'm safe in saying that more women than men don't want this and would consider the event a rape.
> 
> The comment was in the context of the difference between the Golden rule and the Platinum rule - treating others as you would like to be treated (you say rape/I say fun), or treating others as they would like to be treated (you say rape, and I agree with your definition).


I think you have no idea what constitutes rape. There were not quotes around force. And there was no fun. I am sorry. I wish that you could have your sexual fantasy. But what you are talking about has nothing to do with rape.


----------



## BrockLanders

Faithful Wife said:


> Did my point make you feel beat up?
> 
> Because your joke could make some rape victims feel beat up too.
> 
> Do you not see why it is insensitive to trivialize? Because it really is insensitive for the exact reason I quoted. You and every other man are at risk of being violently raped by another man. And thinking about it actually happening isn't very pleasant right? Neither is it pleasant for women to think about similar jokes.
> 
> Your joke was insensitive. But that doesn't mean I think you endorse rape so I don't get why you are being so sensitive now. We are getting on you about the joke because it really does matter what we say and how we say it.


Some estimates say that men are actually raped more than women. Men are more likely to be beaten up by another man, it doesn't mean you can't make a joke about a fight.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anon Pink said:


> So, you subscribe to the old, "no blood no foul" thing?
> 
> Step right up ladies and gents, we have the real deal of ignorance here! 50 cents a piece please, no pushing there Ma'am....


There is no rape without refusal. If you don't want something to happen, you're going to do a hell of a lot more than give a wimpy "no."

Trust me, no ignorance here. I've been accused of rape as a teen by a girl whose devoutly religious parents found out about her losing her virginity to me. If it weren't for her having told a girlfriend how exciting and awesome it was the day before her parents got word, who knows what would have happened to me after she claimed rape.

Therefore, I refuse any definition of rape that can survive on her word against mine. You know what the rapist can't cover up? Bruises and cuts. There ought be no possibility of rape without violence and the evidence thereof.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> There is no rape without refusal. If you don't want something to happen, you're going to do a hell of a lot more than give a wimpy "no."


Why would you want to have sex with someone who said no? Really wondering.


> Trust me, no ignorance here. I've been accused of rape as a teen by a girl whose devoutly religious parents found out about her losing her virginity to me. If it weren't for her having told a girlfriend how exciting and awesome it was the day before her parents got word, who knows what would have happened to me after she claimed rape.
> 
> Therefore, I refuse any definition of rape that can survive on her word against mine. You know what the rapist can't cover up? Bruises and cuts. There ought be no possibility of rape without violence and the evidence thereof.


Somehow I was deprived oxygen for several MINUTES leaving nothing but slight bruising. Explain.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> Maybe just a little?
> 
> Ok, ok, I know, you don't have a sense of humor regarding this issue.
> 
> This may be hard for a woman to understand, but the idea of having a woman sexually force herself on you is not as distasteful for men in general as it is for women. I'm sorry, but that's just the reality of the situation. What a good many men fantasize about you would call rape. What you would call rape, a good number of men would call a fun night out. Why do you think rapists are almost exclusively male?
> 
> I well and truly understand that this notion does not cross the gender barrier with too much regularity (although rape fantasies are common), so I don't expect women to want me to behave this way.


I really do not think that want I call rape, a good number of men would call a fun night out.

Here are the two worst experiences I've had with rape:

*#1:* I was getting out of my car. A guy walked up to me and asked directions to a nearby street. As I was giving him directions he started to strangle me. We struggled. He was strangling me and dragging me across the street to an empty field. I started screaming. so then he had one hand strangling me and the other on my mouth trying to shut me up. So the inside of my mouth was cut up and bleeding from being pushed against my teeth. I was scarped/scratch from bring dragged around on the street. Than goodness the neighbors heard me screaming, came out and this SOB ran away.

So you thing that a good number of men would call this a fun night out?

*#2:* A friend of my brother's offered to walk me home after dark. On the way home we went by a field. He suddenly grabbed my by my hair and pulled me into the fried. Then holding me by my hair he forced me to do things to him and then he fully rapped me. By the time this was over he had pulled out a good 2-3 hands full of my hair.


So you thing that a good number of men would call this a fun night out?

I could go on for pages of these sort of 'fun nights" that I and other women I know have had done to them. If you think this is a fun night out... I just don't know what to say.


----------



## SadSamIAm

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> There's a nice little double standard there I think. I've been groped by women totally inappropriately. A handful of @ss, my inner thigh, even my crotch. I didn't think of them as sexual assaults but surely a female would have.
> 
> And similarly, I'd probably react negatively to a boy groping my daughter. Yet my son getting groped would probably only make me laugh.
> 
> That's just the way it is.


I was at a bush party once many, many years ago. I had been drinking all weekend. I was exhaused and drunk. Could barely talk or walk. A girl came up to me at the fire, grabbed my crotch, led me to a truck and had her way with me.

I wasn't even sure it happened until the next day. I had to ask her if that really happened.

I am guessing if I was a girl, most everyone would say that I was assaulted.

As you say, it is just different.

But I think this explains a bunch about some of the unwanted touching that women get offended at. Young guys (and some immature older guys) think that they like it and that the girl would probably like it. They do it for fun, as a joke and aren't sincerely trying to hurt anyone.

This is the kind of thing that we can teach our sons about. 


Trying to teach your son not to rape someone, would almost always be met with something like, "Why would you even have to tell me that? Do you think I am some sick pervert?"


----------



## Faithful Wife

Ok Cletus, not a joke but a comment. It was still an insensitive comment.

And as far as fantasies I think you would be wrong. Plenty of women fantasize about being roughly taken by a hot tall stranger. 

By mixing a fantasy idea into a rape discussion you are only going to turn the conversation this way every time. Guarantee it.

It was insensitive and honestly I think the idea you are expressing is part of what we need to teach boys about. Like telling them that they can be raped by a huge guy and to protect themselves at all times. Just telling young men this may make them picture it and the fear involved may help them stop making the type of comment you made here.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> I don't buy that's just the way it is. That's just lazy non think. I don't chose to be that way.


I could give you a giant novel on why it is that way... that sexual touch is something of an accomplishment for boys versus something to be protected in females... or that given their physical stature, males aren't really threatened by the physical touch of females.... on and on, because sometimes I really do like to write. But it doesn't matter.

This is the way it is and you will never make a boy feel that sexual touch is threatening, nor anything but a matter of pride. It will always be "Hell yeah, she wants me" or at the very least laughably dismissed even if there's no way he'd have sex with her.

You could pull a FW and claim a man groping me, but the comparison is invalid, because I'm not attracted to men. If I were gay and a man is groping me, I see no reason to feel any differently about it than I presently do about being groped by a woman - even if I don't want her.

I don't think men will ever feel threatened by the touch of their sexual counterparts. Moreover, if some massive gay man decides to rape me... you can be damn certain I'm going to fight back however hopeless it is. This is the kind of unambiguous response women must adopt for rape imo.


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> I think you have no idea what constitutes rape. There were not quotes around force. And there was no fun. I am sorry. I wish that you could have your sexual fantasy. But what you are talking about has nothing to do with rape.


No, ma'am, I understand rape fully. 

However, the list of things to which you would not concede, especially in the larger context of general sexual assault is probably very much larger than the list for most men. 

A rapist is someone who has not internalized the notion that wanting to do something with another person is not license to do that thing.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> I was at a bush party once many, many years ago. I had been drinking all weekend. I was exhaused and drunk. Could barely talk or walk. A girl came up to me at the fire, grabbed my crotch, led me to a truck and had her way with me.
> 
> I wasn't even sure it happened until the next day. I had to ask her if that really happened.
> 
> I am guessing if I was a girl, most everyone would say that I was assaulted.


Yah I would say you were assaulted. I am glad that were not hurt by the event.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> No, ma'am, I understand rape fully.
> 
> However, the list of things to which you would not concede, especially in the larger context of general sexual assault is probably very much larger than the list for most men.


Um. Yah. I would say that is the problem. It is not about lists of things. It's about desire. About consent.



> A rapist is someone who has not internalized the notion that wanting to do something with another person is not license to do that thing.


That I would agree with.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> So you thing that a good number of men would call this a fun night out?


No, not for me. Read SadSamIAm above for what I was referring to. But then, I don't care for BDSM either, so I have no doubt that there is a not-insignificant population who would find what you describe, or something close to it, as somehow erotic. 

I don't have to understand it or empathize with it to know that it exists.


----------



## that.girl

As far as the whole "no violence, no rape" thing goes -
There are ways to coerce a woman without hitting her. You can threaten her, her children, her job. You can convince her that fighting back will make things worse. 
You can force yourself on a woman without beating her.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I could give you a giant novel on why it is that way...


Good god. I know.


> that sexual touch is something of an accomplishment for boys


It
Just
Shouldn't
Be
Thus
My
****ing 
POINT

It should be something healthy and good. I have lived rape. I have lived many, many healthy and wonderful sexual experiences. I have lived lots of low grade yuck along the way. You know where the yuck lay? Accomplishment. Just sick.



> versus something to be protected in females...


This I might agree with if you are saying what I think. Women gatekeeper attitudes are stupid. Women are expected to be virginal. Men like virginal. And then not so much.


----------



## Anonymous07

Cletus said:


> The Case Against Early Cancer Detection | FiveThirtyEight


Thyroid cancer is bit different, but I'm talking about cancers overall, most specifically breast cancer, skin cancer, and prostate cancer(all have big awareness campaigns). The survival rate for these cancers have improved with early detection. 

Prostate cancer: Early detection of prostate cancer. Decreasing the mortality rate. - PubMed - NCBI

skin cancer: Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer Detection and Prevention Information | University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center

Breast cancer: WHO | Breast cancer: prevention and control


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> It
> Just
> Shouldn't
> Be
> Thus
> My
> ****ing
> POINT


Why?

To what authority do you appeal to require that men and women think the same way about being touched sexually? And why is it inherently better that men adopt the female attitude as opposed to the other way 'round? 

Men must, Must, MUST learn about and understand female sexuality and appropriate boundaries. But we are not required to lose our Y chromosome to do so.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> There's a nice little double standard there I think. I've been groped by women totally inappropriately. A handful of @ss, my inner thigh, even my crotch. I didn't think of them as sexual assaults but surely a female would have.
> 
> And similarly, I'd probably react negatively to a boy groping my daughter. Yet my son getting groped would probably only make me laugh.
> 
> That's just the way it is.


If you are ok with being groped, that's your choice.

But no one has to accept it and be ok with it just because you are ok with it.


----------



## unbelievable

It's pretty disgusting how we're sexualizing kids. See how parents are letting 12 year olds out in public. Listen to what parents let 13 year old boys listen to and watch. We shouldn't be all that surprised when they behave in ways absolutely consistent with their training and education.


----------



## Faithful Wife

This thread shows so clearly how much more education the world needs. Thankfully, changes are occurring and education is happening.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> Why would you want to have sex with someone who said no? Really wondering.


I wouldn't know. I don't. I said as much. "Explicit refusal". None of this, she said no initially, but went along as he continued to persuade her. I'm sorry, but that's not what I consider rape. No, stays no, doesn't "go along", and reacts like this is an actual physical assault.



NobodySpecial said:


> Somehow I was deprived oxygen for several MINUTES leaving nothing but slight bruising. Explain.


Explain what? You were slightly bruised. Evidence. Did you immediately call the police? 

If not, please don't give the rape guilt speech. If you're assaulted, you call the police. Yes, I understand some women don't for a variety of bizarre reasons. I don't care. If I'm raped by a stronger man, you can bet I put up a fight and immediately seek to have him arrested if I don't go shoot him myself.

Did you fight? If not, how does one differentiate between asphyxiation during rape vs consensual asphyxiation as some women actually enjoy? A crime requires evidence. It is for this reason I encourage women to fight. Any violent rape will leave evidence confirming it was in fact a rape.

Otherwise, it's her word against his, and I've personally learned how reliable her word is when her reputation is on the line.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> There is no rape without refusal. If you don't want something to happen, you're going to do a hell of a lot more than give a wimpy "no."
> 
> Trust me, no ignorance here. I've been accused of rape as a teen by a girl whose devoutly religious parents found out about her losing her virginity to me. If it weren't for her having told a girlfriend how exciting and awesome it was the day before her parents got word, who knows what would have happened to me after she claimed rape.
> 
> Therefore, I refuse any definition of rape that can survive on her word against mine. You know what the rapist can't cover up? Bruises and cuts. There ought be no possibility of rape without violence and the evidence thereof.


Bruises and cuts are not enough evidence to get a rape conviction. Not even with a gang rape. All the guys have to do is to say it was consensual. Perhaps the member here who had dealt with this will comment.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> Why?
> 
> To what authority do you appeal to require that men and women think the same way about being touched sexually? And why is it inherently better that men adopt the female attitude as opposed to the other way 'round?
> 
> Men must, Must, MUST learn about and understand female sexuality and appropriate boundaries. But we are not required to lose our Y chromosome to do so.


No, not at all. I have a husband. Brothers. A father. Uncles. I have a great husband. Sexuality is never ever even thought of in terms of force.


----------



## notmyrealname4

Cletus said:


> Having an *attractive,* aggressive stranger "force" herself on you is something most men aspire to at least at some point in their life. . . . Of course, *it isn't rape, because it's desired*



You recognize that these two statements cancel each other out; so why make them?

So imagine it is an obese, toothless, old broad with a stinky tw*t and unwiped ass, who "violates" you - in one way or another. Would your outlook remain the same? Can you be honest about that?


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous07 said:


> Thyroid cancer is bit different, but I'm talking about cancers overall, most specifically breast cancer, skin cancer, and prostate cancer(all have big awareness campaigns). The survival rate for these cancers have improved with early detection.


Not by much. Did you read the whole article? Breast and prostate cancers were the primary focus after the Thyroid anecdote a the top.

The FiveThirtyEight site is primarily a data aggregator, they don't do studies themselves, but as the collective data behind prostate and breast cancer survival mounts, it's becoming clear that the hope of early detection is not being matched by the reality of lower mortality. 

From the same site you're referencing:

Likelihood that a woman with screen-detected breast cancer has had ... - PubMed - NCBI

"RESULTS:

We found that for a 50-year-old woman, the estimated risk of having a screen-detected breast cancer in the next 10 years is 1910 per 100,000. Her observed 20-year risk of breast cancer death is 990 per 100,000. Assuming that mammography has already reduced this risk by 20%, the risk of death in the absence of screening would be 1240 per 100,000, which suggests that the mortality benefit accrued to 250 per 100,000. Thus, the probability that a woman with screen-detected breast cancer avoids a breast cancer death because of mammography is 13% (250/1910). This number falls to 3% if screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality by 5%. Similar analyses of women of different ages all yield probability estimates below 25%.

CONCLUSIONS:

*Most women with screen-detected breast cancer have not had their life saved by screening. They are instead either diagnosed early (with no effect on their mortality) or overdiagnosed.*"
[/QUOTE]


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> If you are ok with being groped, that's your choice.
> 
> But no one has to accept it and be ok with it just because you are ok with it.


Nope, no one does. But it's still true that it's not much of a fuss for men. You only need one trip to the club to verify this.

Woman wants to show interest in a man - rubs all up on him. Nearly universally accepted even if he's not really into that woman.

Man wants to show interest in a woman - rubs all up on her. It's about 80-20 in favor of her feeling she is being violated.

Everyone is entitled to feel violated or not, but this is the norm. You're not going to make men feel violated by women's sexual touch. We're going to take it as a compliment, or just laugh. Women are no threat. This is the way it is and will likely always be.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I wouldn't know. I don't. I said as much. "Explicit refusal". None of this, she said no initially, but went along as he continued to persuade her. I'm sorry, but that's not what I consider rape. No, stays no, doesn't "go along", and reacts like this is an actual physical assault.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Explain what? You were slightly bruised. Evidence. Did you immediately call the police?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. When I regained consciousness I called the police.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If not, please don't give the rape guilt speech. If you're assaulted, you call the police. Yes, I understand some women don't for a variety of bizarre reasons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> These reasons are bizarre to you? To include things like this post. Did you do this? Did you do that? What were you wearing? How did you lead him on?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care. If I'm raped by a stronger man, you can bet I put up a fight and immediately seek to have him arrested if I don't go shoot him myself.
> 
> Did you fight?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well no. I didn't. I am not sure how one fights when one is awoken from a dead sleep by a man's penis in her vagina and ... I think it was his forearm on her throat. I think I gasped. Really hard. Does that count?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If not, how does one differentiate between asphyxiation during rape vs consensual asphyxiation as some women actually enjoy? A crime requires evidence. It is for this reason I encourage women to fight. Any violent rape will leave evidence confirming it was in fact a rape.
> 
> Otherwise, it's her word against his, and I've personally learned how reliable her word is when her reputation is on the line.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are a prince among men. I swoon.
Click to expand...


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> No, not for me. Read SadSamIAm above for what I was referring to. But then, I don't care for BDSM either, so I have no doubt that there is a not-insignificant population who would find what you describe, or something close to it, as somehow erotic.
> 
> I don't have to understand it or empathize with it to know that it exists.


Do you understand that the guy who was choking me most likely had very intent of killing me? That is not erotic.


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> No, not at all. I have a husband. Brothers. A father. Uncles. I have a great husband. Sexuality is never ever even thought of in terms of force.


I'm referring to the notion that a boy might find a girl grabbing his crotch as a point of pride as opposed to a violation. No force involved. 

Why is his view wrong?


----------



## NobodySpecial

Ok getting back to the main point of the thread. Families. Have healthy sex lives. (Wonder why you aren't? This thread should be speaking to you.) Teach your children well. Peace out.


----------



## NobodySpecial

EleGirl said:


> Bruises and cuts are not enough evidence to get a rape conviction. Not even with a gang rape. All the guys have to do is to say it was consensual. Perhaps the member here who had dealt with this will comment.


Not even an arrest.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> I'm referring to the notion that a boy might find a girl grabbing his crotch as a point of pride as opposed to a violation. No force involved.
> 
> Why is his view wrong?


Pride. Well I don't care. I don't get it. Accomplishment? Eew.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Nope, no one does. But it's still true that it's not much of a fuss for men. You only need one trip to the club to verify this.
> 
> Woman wants to show interest in a man - rubs all up on him. Nearly universally accepted even if he's not really into that woman.
> 
> Man wants to show interest in a woman - rubs all up on her. It's about 80-20 in favor of her feeling she is being violated.
> 
> Everyone is entitled to feel violated or not, but this is the norm. You're not going to make men feel violated by women's sexual touch. We're going to take it as a compliment, or just laugh. Women are no threat. This is the way it is and will likely always be.


That's all fine if that's what men like and want.

Women generally do not want women groping them and forcing them to have sex. And that is what this thread is about.


----------



## Anonymous07

EleGirl said:


> Bruises and cuts are not enough evidence to get a rape conviction. Not even with a gang rape. All the guys have to do is to say it was consensual. Perhaps the member here who had dealt with this will comment.



My cousin was drugged, gang raped by at least 2 guys(their DNA was matched, but there may have been more), and they got away scot-free. She had bruises on her wrists and other areas of her body, along with vaginal tearing. They dumped her on her parents lawn at 5 am where my aunt found her and immediately took her to the ER. When the 2 guys were questioned by the police, the guys said it was consensual and she "liked it rough". Nothing happened to them and they went about their lives. One of them is even in the police academy about to become a cop himself! My cousin on the other hand, has had to deal with the aftermath and has really struggled to get back to a somewhat normal life. People have "slvt shamed" her for this happening, since the guys were not convicted and blame her for what happened. It's really sick.


----------



## EleGirl

A lot of people who teach women what to do if they are raped, tell women to not fight back because if a woman fights back she is most likely to be killed or beaten so bad that being killed would be preferable.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus, not every man wants the same thing you want and some men have had unwanted touch. Men's experiences are not all the same. Some men would be far more understanding of why your comment was insensitive that you seem to be. 

Point being that what you feel and think cannot be applied to every man so why are you saying things like "we don't have to lose a chromosome" or whatever? Ever known or heard the story of a man who was raped? Some would seem to have a "woman's" view of this issue according to your point.

Anyone who has never experienced unwanted touch, rape, assault, etc. really can't imagine what it is like, ok? That's the bottom line.

Sadly some people can't imagine excessive wanted touching either and those people tend to be the most confused on this issue.


----------



## EleGirl

Anonymous07 said:


> My cousin was drugged, ganged raped by at least 2 guys(their DNA was matched, but there may have been more), and they got away scot-free. She had bruises on her wrists and other areas of her body, along with vaginal tearing. They dumped her on her parents lawn at 5 am where my aunt found her and immediately took her to the ER. When the 2 guys were questioned by the police, the guys said it was consensual and she "liked it rough". Nothing happened to them and they went about their lives. One of them is even in the police academy about to become a cop himself! My cousin on the other hand, has had to deal with the aftermath and has really struggled to get back to a somewhat normal life. People have "slvt shamed" her for this happening, since the guys were not convicted and blame her for what happened. It's really sick.


This shows how much help it is to call the police.

When the guy tried to kill/rape me the police showed up about an hour later, took a report and never even investigated.

The other time, I reported it and was told that I must have brought it on myself.


----------



## unbelievable

EleGirl said:


> Bruises and cuts are not enough evidence to get a rape conviction. Not even with a gang rape. All the guys have to do is to say it was consensual. Perhaps the member here who had dealt with this will comment.


The genuine forcible rape cases are usually fairly easy and physical evidence is the most important in those. Date rape and child rape cases, there's often a "he said/she said" deal and physical evidence is not as convincing. My game plan with those was to find other women the suspect had association with and interview them. A guy doesn't wake up from years of being a decent person and suddenly decide to be a rapist. After a few interviews, I'd usually have four or five victims instead of one. Then, I'd sit Numbnuts down, confront him with all the victims, tell him I'd get him "help" for his "problem" and then record his tearful confession. Pretty much the same deal for the child molesters (non-family). These folks don't usually rape just one kid. Find all the other kids, get their statements, and when I have a mountain of ugly evidence, then sit Numbnuts down and tell him he's going in front of a jury. He can go as a man who has a problem and wants help or he can go as a remorseless, evil, child raper who is and always will be a threat to decent society. It's a little more complicated than that, but you get the idea).


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> Bruises and cuts are not enough evidence to get a rape conviction. Not even with a gang rape. All the guys have to do is to say it was consensual. Perhaps the member here who had dealt with this will comment.


I'm not saying they are. But I will say it's a hell of a lot more likely to have a case with evidence of fighting than without.

If it comes down to he said she said, there is no way to know and I won't remotely presume he raped her, having been falsely accused myself. You say no. He doesn't stop, you leave. Failing that, you fight. There is no ambiguity.

You have to understand the perspective of your average, healthy, non-rapist man. Women, particularly young inexperienced women/girls, are almost always sexually reluctant. Some of the scenarios that get defined as rape are remarkably over reaching. I've been with several reluctant virgins, and it's the same story every time - they want to, but they don't want to. They encourage making out and escalation, then deflect from actual penetration. My continued persuasion in spite of resistance is not rape. She's free to end the situation at any moment. She can simply get up and leave if she chooses. That she goes along with my persuasion does not make me a rapist when she regrets her behavior later and chooses to blame it on my persuasion as if I forced her to do something.

Charges require evidence. A fight is more likely to leave evidence. Bodily harm does in fact argue against it being consensual regardless of what the guys say. Nothing guarantees a conviction, but this makes it a hell of a lot easier.

You want to protect yourselves from rape. We want to protect ourselves from false accusations.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> A lot of people who teach women what to do if they are raped, tell women to not fight back because if a woman fights back she is most likely to be killed or beaten so bad that being killed would be preferable.


Yep, I'm aware. I disagree. I want the dna under the fingernails. The blood stains on their clothes. Their hair at the crime scene. etc

When I think of it, I think of it as an assault like any other. When someone punches me in the face I don't lay down in hopes he'll hit me less. I defend myself the very best I can.


----------



## Anonymous07

EleGirl said:


> This shows how much help it is to call the police.
> 
> When the guy tried to kill/rape me the police showed up about an hour later, took a report and never even investigated.
> 
> The other time, I reported it and was told that I must have brought it on myself.


It's all really sad. When my ex tried to rape me, I didn't even bother telling anyone because I had seen what happened with my cousin's case. What was the point? So I could be called a "slvt"? So people could tell me I should have put out(had been dating for a few months, but was a virgin at the time)? It wasn't worth mentioning, so I kept quiet. It would only end up as my word vs his(even with bruises on me from fighting him), and typically the guy 'wins'.


----------



## unbelievable

I think most people who rape are manipulative, have a sense of entitlement, and a general lack of empathy for others. I don't believe they successfully appear as decent humans their entire life and then magically show up as a rapist. I think the time to re-route a young person is the first time they show these behaviors.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> That's all fine if that's what men like and want.
> 
> Women generally do not want women groping them and forcing them to have sex. And that is what this thread is about.


That's the topic of the thread, but not the theme of the post I was replying to.

Men generally disregard such overt sexual behavior from women. It's not taken seriously. It's not threatening. It's mostly laughable, and maybe even ego boosting/prideful.

The point was that there is a double standard, and that this double standard will exist so long as women feel vulnerable to men, and men don't feel threatened by women. So unless the lopsidedness of our physical strength changes, this probably won't change.

Hence my initial response, "This is just the way it is".


----------



## NobodySpecial

Anonymous07 said:


> It's all really sad. When my ex tried to rape me, I didn't even bother telling anyone because I had seen what happened with my cousin's case. What was the point? So I could be called a "slvt"? So people could tell me I should have put out(had been dating for a few months, but was a virgin at the time)? It wasn't worth mentioning, so I kept quiet. It would only end up as my word vs his(even with bruises on me from fighting him), and typically the guy 'wins'.


What does Dvl call these reasons? Bizarre? You know what is funny is that this disconnect is directly related to the male female difficulties you see all over this board. This kind of attitude is directly related to why women don't want to have sex with their husbands. Honestly, if my husband was like this, I would not have sex with him at all. I would be appalled.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> Cletus, not every man wants the same thing you want and some men have had unwanted touch. Men's experiences are not all the same. Some men would be far more understanding of why your comment was insensitive that you seem to be.
> 
> Point being that what you feel and think cannot be applied to every man so why are you saying things like "we don't have to lose a chromosome" or whatever?


Because I can speak of men in the aggregate and still be accurate. The exceptions do not erase the large statistically meaningful difference between the genders on this issue. Because the post to which I WAS DIRECTLY RESPONDING, and which you have ignored, said that men should NOT FIND IT ACCEPTABLE to be groped. Let me refresh your memory:

Originally Posted by NobodySpecial 
It
Just
Shouldn't
Be
Thus
My
****ing
POINT



> Anyone who has never experienced unwanted touch, rape, assault, etc. really can't imagine what it is like, ok? That's the bottom line.


Don't be patronizing. You know I understand this, and you know this has not been my point all along. You also know full well that if you interviewed every single man on earth to find what he considered "unwanted touch", did the same for the women, and compiled the results, the difference would be striking and obvious. 

Suggesting otherwise would be disingenuous.


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> Pride. Well I don't care. I don't get it. Accomplishment? Eew.


Well, we men are required to understand your feelings on the issue. Might a little reciprocity be in order?


----------



## Anonymous07

unbelievable said:


> The genuine forcible rape cases are usually fairly easy and physical evidence is the most important in those.


If it's so "easy", then how come so many rapist get away??

I bring up my cousin's case again because it had more than enough evidence(traces of drugs in her system, bruising, surveillance videos of her being carried away basically unconscious, vaginal tearing, etc.), and yet absolutely nothing happened to the guys who raped her. It's not so easy to convict someone of rape.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

FrenchFry said:


> Dvls, you pretty much have the worst case of "If you don't do it the way I like, it's wrong," ever.


Yeah, I know. It's just on some subjects, I hate the fluffy ambiguous stuff.

Don't ruminate on all the reasons a woman might not call the cops after being raped. Don't justify not calling the cops. Am I being tough? Unsympathetic? Yes! I don't care about those reasons. I want to reinforce that women ALWAYS need to fight a rape like that would any other physical assault, and call the cops like they would any other physical assault. No ruminating wiggle room. You said no, you tried to leave, you fought him, he raped you. Call the cops. Repeat until no girl believes there is any concern above her calling the cops if she's raped, and is more likely to have evidence of it.


----------



## Anonymous07

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Yep, I'm aware. I disagree. I want the dna under the fingernails. The blood stains on their clothes. Their hair at the crime scene. etc
> 
> When I think of it, I think of it as an assault like any other. When someone punches me in the face I don't lay down in hopes he'll hit me less. I defend myself the very best I can.


I took a self-defense class in college after my ex had attempted to rape me and we were taught that there are times when you should fight back and times when you should not in order to best survive different scenarios.


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous07 said:


> I took a self-defense class in college after my ex had attempted to rape me and we were taught that there are times when you should fight back and times when you should not in order to best survive different scenarios.


I'm curious in what scenarios were you advised to not fight back? Not so much because they exist, but I would think figuring out which you're in at the time would be difficult.


----------



## that.girl

Dvl, do you really believe that in the moment of being raped, a woman will be more concerned with her ability to prosecute than with her actual physical survival? 

I don't.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> I've heard a lot of men tell rape jokes.


I never have. Not once. If anyone in my social group told a rape joke, they would be ostracized.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> Yes. When I regained consciousness I called the police.


Great! And you give credibility to the reasons other women don't? I say we should not give these reasons a platform. They must only be considered irrelevant. They should not be allowed legitimacy.



NobodySpecial said:


> [
> These reasons are bizarre to you? To include things like this post. Did you do this? Did you do that? What were you wearing? How did you lead him on?


Yes, those reasons are bizzare to me. For one, I came this close to going into criminal justice. I'm a Marine. Most of my Marine friends became cops. "How did you lead him on?" and "What were you wearing?" are not questions asked - nowadays, most departments require specific training for rape cases. However, even if they were, so what? "I wore a sl*tty outfit and made out with him... then he wanted sex and I said no, he wouldn't stop so I tried to leave, he wouldn't let me leave so I fought him."

Those questions makes no difference to me. Her efforts to not be raped matter to me. None of this, "hang on babe, let me put some pillows down so my back doesn't get tore up - I'd like to get out of this assault with as little damage as possible". Participation implies consent. Her actions should remove all ambiguity.



NobodySpecial said:


> Well no. I didn't. I am not sure how one fights when one is awoken from a dead sleep by a man's penis in her vagina and ... I think it was his forearm on her throat. I think I gasped. Really hard. Does that count?


I'm sorry. What are you arguing against? Choking someone out leaves significant marks on the neck, as well as tending to cause noticeable capillary damage in the eyes. Evidence of an assault. If this guy wasn't your bf, or a guy who can demonstrate he already had a sexual relationship with you, he said she said isn't going to fly. "Well, she wanted to be choked out the first time we had sex." He has a greater burden to use the kinky defense.

Out of curiosity, what do you advise for sorting such things out? Her word is always supreme? Been there before. No thanks.



NobodySpecial said:


> You are a prince among men. I swoon.


Aww... have I really been that controversial? I encourage women to fight and call the police. I say make sure there is no ambiguity that it was rape. I have no sympathy and entertain no excuses for not doing so... and women themselves should not be tempted by those excuses. You were assaulted. Be indignant. Fight and seek justice... right then.


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> What does Dvl call these reasons? Bizarre? You know what is funny is that this disconnect is directly related to the male female difficulties you see all over this board. This kind of attitude is directly related to why women don't want to have sex with their husbands. Honestly, if my husband was like this, I would not have sex with him at all. I would be appalled.


And many women leave their husband because he is too nice. Too predictable. They want the bad boy. The one that takes what he wants, doesn't ask. 

There is a double standard and the message that women often give men contradict what you are saying.


----------



## Deejo

India: Sisters Aarti and Pooja Kumar to get cash reward after fighting 'sexual harassers'

Same story had a very different, and tragic ending in December 2012.

I do however find it very ironic that women want to have THIS conversation, but were disgusted by the other, now closed thread.

To be fair, they seem pretty disgusted here too, which still makes me wonder what about the subject is worth opening up and taking a look at given how emotional and raw the topic is.

I imagine those that have been raped are going to have strong opinions.

I imagine the same for those that have been accused of being rapists.

There are ways to teach our sons about love, sex and compassion that needn't require teaching them not to rape.


----------



## EleGirl

Anonymous07 said:


> It's all really sad. When my ex tried to rape me, I didn't even bother telling anyone because I had seen what happened with my cousin's case. What was the point? So I could be called a "slvt"? So people could tell me I should have put out(had been dating for a few months, but was a virgin at the time)? It wasn't worth mentioning, so I kept quiet. It would only end up as my word vs his(even with bruises on me from fighting him), and typically the guy 'wins'.


One of my sisters was raped and beaten by her husband. The police came out and did nothing.


----------



## Cletus

Deejo said:


> There are ways to teach our sons about love, sex and compassion that needn't require teaching them not to rape.


I don't think I ever sat my son down and taught him not to rape, except perhaps to understand the "no means no" concept. If I ever felt the need to have that specific conversation, I think I would have already considered his upbringing to be a failure.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> That's the topic of the thread, but not the theme of the post I was replying to.
> 
> Men generally disregard such overt sexual behavior from women. It's not taken seriously. It's not threatening. It's mostly laughable, and maybe even ego boosting/prideful.
> 
> The point was that there is a double standard, and that this double standard will exist so long as women feel vulnerable to men, *and men don't feel threatened by women*. So unless the lopsidedness of our physical strength changes, this probably won't change.
> 
> Hence my initial response, "This is just the way it is".


Ah... I just learned something here. 

All of us women need to get very aggressive towards men in a very negative, aggressive fashion. Not something the men like, something that they don't want.

For example I've had a guy grab my boobs so hard that it hurts. So let's grab men's crotches so hard that it hurts.. gets them withering on the ground.

Oh yea... I can some up with things we woman can do to men on this level. How about it ladies?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> One of my sisters was raped and beaten by her husband. The police came out and did nothing.


Are you implying some sort of conspiracy? Or are you stating there was insufficient evidence? Because they can't just show up and leave given charges of rape. It doesn't work like that.


----------



## Anonymous07

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> If this guy wasn't your bf, or a guy who can demonstrate he already had a sexual relationship with you, he said she said isn't going to fly.


You do realize that husbands/boyfriends can rape their wives/girlfriends, right? So because my boyfriend attempted to rape me, it's ok because we were in a relationship(but never had sex)?


----------



## Anon Pink

Deejo said:


> I do however find it very ironic that women want to have THIS conversation, but were disgusted by the other, now closed thread.
> 
> To be fair, they seem pretty disgusted here too, which still makes me wonder what about the subject is worth opening up and taking a look at given how emotional and raw the topic is.
> 
> I imagine those that have been raped are going to have strong opinions.
> 
> I imagine the same for those that have been accused of being rapists.
> 
> There are ways to teach our sons about love, sex and compassion that needn't require teaching them not to rape.


The other thread was about women learning to not be raped. So i thought it might be good to teach men how not to rape.



> When Golda Meir was asked to place a curfew on women to help end a series of rapes, Meir replied by stating, “But it is the men who are attacking the women. If there is to be a curfew, let the men stay at home.”


The Best Statement Made About Rape | Gold Meir’s Curfew for Men | Motley News


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> I'm curious in what scenarios were you advised to not fight back? Not so much because they exist, but I would think figuring out which you're in at the time would be difficult.


Here's a time when fighting back is not a good idea.

Sally is asleep and woke up to a man with a large knife at her throat .. he said he'd kill her if she made a sound. He then raped her.


----------



## that.girl

EleGirl said:


> Here's a time when fighting back is not a good idea.
> 
> Sally is asleep and woke up to a man with a large knife at her throat .. he said he'd kill her if she made a sound. He then raped her.


In this circumstance, it might be wise not to fight.
I guarantee, she is not thinking about whether she can prosecute. She is thinking about how she can survive.
And this is still rape, even if she didn't say the word no or fight back. If it's not rape, then what is it? It's definitely not consensual sex.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> I never have. Not once. If anyone in my social group told a rape joke, they would be ostracized.


I applaud you for your attitude. 

I know that not all men tell jokes and make light of rape.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> Here's a time when fighting back is not a good idea.
> 
> Sally is asleep and woke up to a man with a large knife at her throat .. he said he'd kill her if she made a sound. He then raped her.


Ok, that one's pretty obvious. Are there instances where you're expected to figure out the mental state of the rapist even if he hasn't put a knife to your throat/gun to your head? 

Bear with me. I understand the inherent male privilege of not ever needing to take a rape prevention class.


----------



## Anonymous07

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Are you implying some sort of conspiracy? Or are you stating there was insufficient evidence? Because they can't just show up and leave given charges of rape. It doesn't work like that.


No conspiracy, just real life. 

Look at my cousin's case I wrote about earlier. Things like this happen more often than you think.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus, actually I'm not sure where you are coming from because I'm genuinely surprised at the things you are saying here today. 

Deejo, I think both threads are gross and would be happy to see this one deleted, too.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> Ah... I just learned something here.
> 
> All of us women need to get very aggressive towards men in a very negative, aggressive fashion. Not something the men like, something that they don't want.
> 
> For example I've had a guy grab my boobs so hard that it hurts. So let's grab men's crotches so hard that it hurts.. gets them withering on the ground.
> 
> Oh yea... I can some up with things we woman can do to men on this level. How about it ladies?


If women groped like that, there's going to be a lot more Ray Rice cases. lol I have no problem with your logic, I don't grope period. But you know the predominant issue with groping among women isn't pain, but simply the violation of her right to exclude unwelcomed touch. My comment was on the double standard of how a man will react to being groped (not painfully) himself, or seeing his daughter vs son groped. There is a double standard there.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> Cletus, actually I'm not sure where you are coming from because I'm genuinely surprised at the things you are saying here today.
> 
> Deejo, I think both threads are gross and would be happy to see this one deleted, too.


You're surprised to hear me say that more men than women would find unprovoked sexual contact acceptable? 

Because that's all I'm saying, and I'd bet a week's salary that I could empirically prove it. Did you hear something else?


----------



## TiggyBlue

Faithful Wife said:


> Cletus, actually I'm not sure where you are coming from because I'm genuinely surprised at the things you are saying here today.
> 
> Deejo, I think both threads are gross and would be happy to see this one deleted, too.


:iagree:

A few of the posts on this thread are pretty disturbing.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anonymous07 said:


> You do realize that husbands/boyfriends can rape their wives/girlfriends, right? So because my boyfriend attempted to rape me, it's ok because we were in a relationship(but never had sex)?


I do. But an existing *sexual* relationship gives greater credibility to a kinky defense.

Let me be clear: My opinion isn't about whether or not a rape occurred. My opinion relates to the necessity of evidence of rape.

If there's no evidence, I'm not sure what you want anyone to do about it. Why should anyone take her word over his?

This is ultimately the problem in discussing rape, and why I believe it's so important to fight and clearly demonstrate violent resistance and the increased likelihood of evidence.

Her simply saying rape, doesn't make it so.


----------



## EleGirl

Deejo said:


> India: Sisters Aarti and Pooja Kumar to get cash reward after fighting 'sexual harassers'
> 
> Same story had a very different, and tragic ending in December 2012.
> 
> *I do however find it very ironic that women want to have THIS conversation, but were disgusted by the other, now closed thread.*
> 
> To be fair, they seem pretty disgusted here too, which still makes me wonder what about the subject is worth opening up and taking a look at given how emotional and raw the topic is.
> 
> I imagine those that have been raped are going to have strong opinions.
> 
> I imagine the same for those that have been accused of being rapists.
> 
> There are ways to teach our sons about love, sex and compassion that needn't require teaching them not to rape.


The reason that women were upset about the other thread is that the poster who started it had been told over and over by women on another thread that have been taught to be careful to void being a victim, that we practice those things and that we teach our children those things.

But he continued to ignore what we said. Then he had this in his original post:


*"The women didn't really seem to have an 'answer' to rape except a) wait for men to change, b) try to draft questionable legislation and c) act in a terribly paranoid way around men."*

It was his attitude and assumption that none of us women practice any kind of safety measures. And so he was going to teach us safety.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Are you implying some sort of conspiracy? Or are you stating there was insufficient evidence? Because they can't just show up and leave given charges of rape. It doesn't work like that.


Yes they do... very often.


----------



## that.girl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> If you don't want to, DON'T DO IT.
> 
> I cannot abide by any concept of rape that does not involve her defending herself or being drugged.






DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Let me be clear: My opinion isn't about whether or not a rape occurred. My opinion relates to the necessity of evidence of rape.


I think you being clear might be a good idea, because now I'm confused. I think it's that first bit that some of us have a problem with.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> Ok, that one's pretty obvious. Are there instances where you're expected to figure out the mental state of the rapist even if he hasn't put a knife to your throat/gun to your head?
> 
> Bear with me. I understand the inherent male privilege of not ever needing to take a rape prevention class.


Yes, there is a need to determine a rapist's mental state. It's not just his mental state, his size counts as well.

If you are walking and a guy your size grabs you or hits you... what will you do? Fight back? Most likely.

What if you are an average size guy and a guy 6'4", outweighing you by 50-100 lbs does this. What are you going to do? Fight? Run? (keep in mind that he will probably catch you if you run).

So now the big guy caught you, has you by a choke hold, pulls down your pants and butt rapes you. 

How much can you fight back? He has you immobilized.


----------



## that.girl

Dvl, I think most of us can agree that rape without evidence is difficult to prove. But you make it sound as if it didn't happen unless it can be proved, and that's just not true. And you make it sound as if a woman should risk her life and safety to be able to have that proof, and I disagree.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> If women groped like that, there's going to be a lot more Ray Rice cases. lol I have no problem with your logic, I don't grope period. But you know the predominant issue with groping among women isn't pain, but simply the violation of her right to exclude unwelcomed touch. My comment was on the double standard of how a man will react to being groped (not painfully) himself, or seeing his daughter vs son groped. There is a double standard there.


I'm not sure that I would call it a double standard that some men like to be groped and most women feel that they are violated by groping.

It's be like saying that there is a double standard because some people love chocolate cake and other are allergic to chocolate cake and get ill when they eat it.


A standard assumes societal judgment. Whether or not a person, male or female, feels violated by groping is an individual choice.


----------



## EleGirl

that.girl said:


> Dvl, I think most of us can agree that rape without evidence is difficult to prove. But you make it sound as if it didn't happen unless it can be proved, and that's just not true. And you make it sound as if a woman should risk her life and safety to be able to have that proof, and I disagree.


I agree. I think he's been pretty clear that unless the woman objects to the point of being hurt fighting back, it's not rape. And even then, maybe she wanted it rough and it's his word against hers.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> Here's a time when fighting back is not a good idea.
> 
> Sally is asleep and woke up to a man with a large knife at her throat .. he said he'd kill her if she made a sound. He then raped her.


I'll agree with that. I'm just hyper defensive about he said she said cases (with obvious reason), and unlike the tendency in he said she said cases, these tend to get reported immediately.

I'm curious. In the past there have been male complaint threads that women declared worthless because the men had no solution. Does the same apply here?

What would women realistically change in the handling of rape? Teaching sons not to rape? Is that to say a rapist isn't aware that it's wrong? I think we'll agree that they are aware. So what does "teach sons not to rape" even mean, if the rapists know they're not supposed to rape.

If the rapist knows it's wrong and does it anyway, and there's no evidence but he said she said... what is it you actually want to see happen?


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> A standard assumes societal judgment. Whether or not a person, male or female, feels violated by groping is an individual choice.


Which is precisely the point I was making earlier when I said you should treat others as they want to be treated, not as you would like to be treated. One projects your feelings onto them, the other does not.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> I agree. I think he's been pretty clear that unless the women objects to the point of being hurt fighting back, it's not rape. And even then, maybe she wanted it rough and it's his word against hers.


And you have a better way to attempt to rule out ambiguity? Please, tell me now you differentiate between a false accusation and an actual rape.

We, third parties, should believe it's rape simply because she says so?


----------



## that.girl

I'll be the realistic woman for a moment and return this thread to where it started.
We'll probably never end rape, just as we'll never end murder. But rape can happen (at least) two ways, by force and by misunderstanding.

We should teach our daughters to be confident and clear with their consent or refusal. And we should teach our sons to respect that consent or refusal, and to ask for it if they don't get it.
We shouldn't expect them to just know these things because we raised them right. If I had a dollar for every time I've said to my kids, "You should have known better" I'd be a rich woman.


----------



## SadSamIAm

that.girl said:


> I'll be the realistic woman for a moment and return this thread to where it started.
> We'll probably never end rape, just as we'll never end murder. But rape can happen (at least) two ways, by force and by misunderstanding.
> 
> We should teach our daughters to be confident and clear with their consent or refusal. And we should teach our sons to respect that consent or refusal, and to ask for it if they don't get it.
> We shouldn't expect them to just know these things because we raised them right. If I had a dollar for every time I've said to my kids, "You should have known better" I'd be a rich woman.


And I bet 95% of the times that you told them 'You should have known better", they actually did know better. No amount of teaching would have prevented them from doing whatever they did.

Everyone knows better than to rape someone.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

FrenchFry said:


> You have this idea that police actually give a ****.
> 
> Then you posit that if you aren't fighting back hard enough, it's not clearly rape.
> 
> These two do not go well together.


Knowing so many cops I have more than an idea that police actually give a ****. I know enough, and believe their claims of other officers, to know most actually DO give a ****.

On the second charge, you have mistaken me. I don't argue for fighting back because it defines rape necessarily (though I may have oversold it ), I argue for it so as to help prove rape. In particular, I have the fluffy rape case in mind - the "he pressured me" case that isn't actually rape, but her own inability to stand up for her boundaries. Or capitulation for imagined fear that he won't stop. Claiming you said no, while he says you said yes, in light of no other evidence is worthless. I have no reason to believe her over him. So what are we to do? I mean seriously, I've read stories of women who didn't try to stop him, because they were afraid he'd rape them if she did. wtf kind of reasoning is this?

I suspect there's a bias here. I believe women are more prone to believe every rape accusation they hear, and tend to discount that false accusations are a REAL, and not uncommon thing. Having had one thrown at me, which she eventually owned up to, I'm very defensive about rape accusations. Everyone hears you're a rapist. No one hears that the accusation was recanted.


----------



## Cletus

that.girl said:


> I'll be the realistic woman for a moment and return this thread to where it started.
> We'll probably never end rape, just as we'll never end murder. But rape can happen (at least) two ways, by force and by misunderstanding.


I think this is a very salient point.

I'm old enough to have been born before the consent question became mainstream. Rape then meant forcible rape - the kind where a woman is physically overcome and coerced into a sex act. Date rape hadn't been invented yet (the term, not the notion). It's not the first thing that comes to mind when I hear the word rape. 

The violent variety is the kind that you hope you inoculated your son to by raising him right, to respect others. The second is nuanced enough that it probably does require some additional teaching. 

The concept of active consent is one solution to the problem, but it sure feels to me like a buzz kill to be constantly asking "Is this OK? Is this OK?". Women having the strength to say "No" and men having the integrity to respect that and the education to recognize it seems to be a better choice.


----------



## that.girl

I love active consent, you don't have to take it to an extreme. There's nothing wrong with "So you're okay with this?" "Yes."
If she says "Umm...", you should probably stop and assess the situation.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> A standard assumes societal judgment. Whether or not a person, male or female, feels violated by groping is an individual choice.


The question was presented with observer as a third party. "What if your daughter was groped" vs my retort "What if my son was groped". The two elicit quite different responses.

If a girl grabs my sons @ss... I'm going to laugh my ass off. If a boy grabs my daughter's ass, I'm going to want to kick his @ss.

That's the double standard I refer to. The perception that it's alright and non-threatening for males to be groped, but unacceptable and threatening for females to be groped. This double standard exists for most things sexual. Notice there's not nearly the vile for a 30 year old female having sex with a 14 year old male as there is for a 30 year old male having sex with a 14 year old female. Society assumes the male wants that attention, and the female should be protected from it. I have a hard time with female pedophilia cases - when I was 14, damn right I wanted to have sex with one of my teachers. I have a hard time figuring how I wanted to be a "victim".


----------



## Cletus

that.girl said:


> I love active consent, you don't have to take it to an extreme. There's nothing wrong with "So you're okay with this?" "Yes."
> If she says "Umm...", you should probably stop and assess the situation.


Ok, so what are the "consent points" a man should stop and ask about with you? What is implied as acceptable and what should be explicit? How would I know ahead of time? Is there a consent score card we both fill out? Maybe it works in practice, but I'd be so up in my head the whole time worrying that touching her left shoulder is OK but not her left thigh.

Within my own long term marriage this is actually a problem, as I have a mate whose default position on most mainstream sexual behaviors is "no". Consent isn't even implied in my marital bed, and as a result, I have a pretty hard foot on the brake pedal at all times.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
Whether or not to physically fight back under the threat of rape is entirely the choice of the target / victim. Depending on the circumstances they may put themselves at risk of worse harm or death if they fight back. So, lack of physical resistance in no way disqualifies something as rape. (this is so situation dependent that I don't think its possible to give general advice).

I think that the only onus on the victim is to make it clear to the attacker that they are not consenting. Unconsciousness does this by default. Otherwise the victim should at least tell the attacker clearly "no". 

I do remember a story from another group where a woman at a party found herself alone with a large threatening-looking black man. He started touching her and she did and said nothing. The thing was, he didn't in any way threaten, she just felt threatened by his appearance. I think that at least she needed to say "no" once. 

Under the "active consent" laws in place in some areas that might still be considered rape, but I think it is a very borderline situation. Surely no one should ever touch a frightened-looking woman, but there is a wide range between "should not" and "violent felony". Some leeway needs to be given for misunderstood signals. To be clear though - "no" is not a confusing signal, it is very clear in meaning.


----------



## that.girl

Cletus said:


> Ok, so what are the "consent points" a man should stop and ask about with you? What is implied as acceptable and what should be explicit?


That's a good question. I'm sure it's different for every woman.
I guess if I initiate an action, you don't need to ask. If I'm clearly and obviously into it, participating and responding, you don't need to ask. Sometimes there's really no doubt.
Past that, I'd say going below the belt is a good consent point. And actual sex. I feel like oral sex should be, but it's also kind of hard to get there without the other helping, so that one made me pause for a minute.


----------



## Cletus

that.girl said:


> That's a good question. I'm sure it's different for every woman.


And that's the challenge. Failure to stop at a consent point coupled with a inexpressive partner can land you into rape territory pretty easily. 

Hearing the word "No" removes all ambiguity, which is why I truly believe (like Richard above) that the burden of determining appropriate behavior has to fall on the person who feels violated.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

that.girl said:


> I'll be the realistic woman for a moment and return this thread to where it started.
> We'll probably never end rape, just as we'll never end murder. But rape can happen (at least) two ways, by force and by misunderstanding.
> 
> We should teach our daughters to be confident and clear with their consent or refusal. And we should teach our sons to respect that consent or refusal, and to ask for it if they don't get it.
> We shouldn't expect them to just know these things because we raised them right. If I had a dollar for every time I've said to my kids, "You should have known better" I'd be a rich woman.


I very much agree with you, with only one little tweak. I've been with more than one woman who appreciated my assertiveness. My certainty of action. That somehow my sure pursuit, when she was unsure, was "comforting".

I know this to be true: If a male does not persuade and pursue toward his wants, he typically doesn't get laid. That right there seems to argue that women prefer such assertiveness to the guy who always seems to wimp out when she's reserved.

So "respect refusal" is a little more tricky than a simple yes or no. If I respected refusal, I would have been well into my 20s before losing my virginity. There is definite encouragement involved that should not be mistaken for disrespecting refusal.

I was raised by a single mom who repeatedly taught, "no means no". By many people's definition, I am even a rape-baby. My mom's bf at the time had sex with her while she was passed out at a party. But experience has taught me something else - that if you don't press forward in the face of resistance, NOTHING happens.

I think we should be careful to differentiate assertiveness, even persuasion, from being disrespectful of her refusal. The guys who give up at the first sign of resistance, tend to be your long time virgins.


----------



## that.girl

Cletus said:


> And that's the challenge. Failure to stop at a consent point coupled with a inexpressive partner can land you into rape territory pretty easily.
> 
> Hearing the word "No" removes all ambiguity, which is why I truly believe (like Richard above) that the burden of determining appropriate behavior has to fall on the person who feels violated.


You're not wrong. If someone feels violated, they should speak up. But many of the cases of this type happen with younger people who lack confidence and sexual awareness.
And so, I think it would be wise to teach our sons that a gentleman should make sure he's wanted (and that his lady is sober and of age) before he proceeds too far. For their protection, and the protection of other people's daughters.

When asked how they talked to their sons about rape, many men on here said they didn't specifically talk about it, that their sons were good boys. Maybe we need to talk about it anyway.


----------



## coffee4me

I've thought a lot about this in regard to a young man I know. His parents did everything "right". His mother read all the books. He was the "ideal" son, she didnt let him play with toy guns or play violent video games. He was an Eagle Scout and blah, blah, blah... He's a predator. 

He plotted to molest a girl 6 years younger than him. He was stopped by other young men who now look at him as a pedophile. 

I knew this kid his whole life. Why did he act as he did? Did he know it was wrong? Absolutely. He plotted anyway and avoided all the common sense reasons to stop and not act. 

Could his parents have said anything to change his disregard for a younger, weaker person? Could they have taught him something that would make him think differently than he did? They thought they had, they thought him incapable of such an act. 

They still want to believe him incapable. They want to believe that he wouldn't hurt another. But his peers know that's not true, he is capable, he would take advantage of a vulnerable woman or girl. The only thing getting caught taught him was to be more careful next time, choose his target more carefully. 

I've actually been told by a few men that his behavior could just be from raging hormones not an intentional thought to do harm. Raging hormones do not make men into predators. There's a deeper dysfunction, lack of empathy, objectification of their victim. 

I've wondered many times why he thought the way he did and could he have been taught otherwise. But I'm sure like many predators he was taught otherwise.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> And you have a better way to attempt to rule out ambiguity? Please, tell me now you differentiate between a false accusation and an actual rape.
> 
> We, third parties, should believe it's rape simply because she says so?


Here is where the problem lies.

Since men are taught that unless the woman has visible injuries, it's not rape. So a lot of men think that to force woman up to that point of injury, is not rape.

And even when a woman has visible injuries, every guy knows that all he has to do is to claim that she liked it that way and it was consensual.

I completely agree that the fact that it's one people's words against the other it's hard to prove rape.

Soo... I think that women need to get a lot smarter. We need to just quit having sex with men until there is a signed contract of agreement and a video/audio tape running at all time. That would work very well.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I'm curious. In the past there have been male complaint threads that women declared worthless because the men had no solution. Does the same apply here?


I don't know which threads you are talking about so I cannot comment on this.


----------



## norajane

coffee4me said:


> He plotted to molest a girl 6 years younger than him. *He was stopped by other young men *who now look at him as a pedophile.


I'm sure his parents did everything right. So did the parents of those other young men. Their recognition of what was going on and their willingness to act made a huge difference in that young girl's life.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> On the second charge, you have mistaken me. I don't argue for fighting back because it defines rape necessarily (though I may have oversold it ), I argue for it so as to help prove rape. In particular, I have the fluffy rape case in mind - the "he pressured me" case that isn't actually rape, but her own inability to stand up for her boundaries. Or capitulation for imagined fear that he won't stop. Claiming you said no, while he says you said yes, in light of no other evidence is worthless. I have no reason to believe her over him. So what are we to do? I mean seriously, I've read stories of women who didn't try to stop him, because they were afraid he'd rape them if she did. wtf kind of reasoning is this?
> 
> I suspect there's a bias here. I believe women are more prone to believe every rape accusation they hear, and tend to discount that false accusations are a REAL, and not uncommon thing. Having had one thrown at me, which she eventually owned up to, I'm very defensive about rape accusations. Everyone hears you're a rapist. No one hears that the accusation was recanted.


I agree that women need to say NO, STOP, etc loud and clear. And that if fighting back does not put them in danger of losing their lives or putting them in a comma for the rest of their lives, they need to fight back like cats (those big jungle cats). 

But there are rapes, that are clearly rapes, that lead to no visible injury... like my friend with the knife to her throat.


----------



## RandomDude

coffee4me said:


> RD my daughter started martial arts at 6. She's a dancer and princess, she did not enjoy it and for 2 years frankly she got her a$$ kicked but she wasn't allowed to quit.
> 
> The training is not just in the body, it's in the mind. The mental training is what makes all the difference. Learning to stand up and stand tall and keep fighting even when she thought she was beat. It's empowering!!! And for the next 3 years she was no longer gettin her a$$ kicked, she was kickin a$$!!!! At 13 she nobody's victim never been bullied at school, stands up for those who are bullied. She knows how to manage fear and her fight instincts are exactly that, instinct because she was trained young.
> 
> By the time your daughter comes of age it will be too late. Your daughter will have already developed much of her personality now is the time to teach her to stand up for herself. It will make a difference not just in defending herself but also empowers her to stand against peer pressure and the pressure that boys put on her.


*sigh* I guess I have been too accommodating with her...

Still I don't know how to discipline her in such a way as to force her into martial training (not to mention I'll have to deal with ex as well) if she doesn't want it.


----------



## EleGirl

RandomDude said:


> *sigh* I guess I have been too accommodating with her...
> 
> Still I don't know how to discipline her in such a way as to force her into martial training (not to mention I'll have to deal with ex as well) if she doesn't want it.


Maybe look at is as dance? There are patterns that need to be learned. Smooth, graceful movements are required.


----------



## norajane

RandomDude said:


> *sigh* I guess I have been too accommodating with her...
> 
> Still I don't know how to discipline her in such a way as to force her into martial training (not to mention I'll have to deal with ex as well) if she doesn't want it.


Tell her you'll be chaperoning all her future dates unless she takes the class. 

Offer to trade the classes for something else she doesn't like to do. Like, if she hates broccoli, tell her she doesn't have to eat it at dinner if she takes the class.


----------



## ConanHub

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I very much agree with you, with only one little tweak. I've been with more than one woman who appreciated my assertiveness. My certainty of action. That somehow my sure pursuit, when she was unsure, was "comforting".
> 
> I know this to be true: If a male does not persuade and pursue toward his wants, he typically doesn't get laid. That right there seems to argue that women prefer such assertiveness to the guy who always seems to wimp out when she's reserved.
> 
> So "respect refusal" is a little more tricky than a simple yes or no. If I respected refusal, I would have been well into my 20s before losing my virginity. There is definite encouragement involved that should not be mistaken for disrespecting refusal.
> 
> I was raised by a single mom who repeatedly taught, "no means no". By many people's definition, I am even a rape-baby. My mom's bf at the time had sex with her while she was passed out at a party. But experience has taught me something else - that if you don't press forward in the face of resistance, NOTHING happens.
> 
> I think we should be careful to differentiate assertiveness, even persuasion, from being disrespectful of her refusal. The guys who give up at the first sign of resistance, tend to be your long time virgins.


Interesting sexual history. I never had to push. They all were very clear in wanting me or were quite aggressive. None of them even took the time for protection. I did not get into "taking" a woman until with my wife for a while. Lost my virginity to a very aggressive sex hound when I was 14. I think pushy is a bit dangerous with a newer partner.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## RandomDude

EleGirl said:


> Maybe look at is as dance? There are patterns that need to be learned. Smooth, graceful movements are required.


Sure, but it's my daughter's impression that has to be changed, not mine. Like hell I've tried to surround her with as much influence as I can, and heck sometimes she gets in the mood to jump around and beg me to watch her attempt to do kung fu (with rather cute results as you can expect).

But then whenever I ask her to take classes she puts her hands behind her back, looks down and tells me she doesn't want to -.-



norajane said:


> Tell her you'll be chaperoning all her future dates unless she takes the class.
> 
> Offer to trade the classes for something else she doesn't like to do. Like, if she hates broccoli, tell her she doesn't have to eat it at dinner if she takes the class.


=/

Good idea, might try that next time, striking a deal. Would be great if this works, as if I convince my daughter, chances are my ex would be convinced too. What if no matter what I try, she still refuses?


----------



## norajane

RandomDude said:


> Good idea, might try that next time, striking a deal. Would be great if this works, as if I convince my daughter, chances are my ex would be convinced too. What if no matter what I try, she still refuses?


Ask her again in a year. She might change her mind as gets older and her interests develop in more directions.


----------



## coffee4me

RD, it will be difficult to get your daughter to cooperate without the support of your X. 

My way is not conventional. I started my son at 5 and told him its not an optional program. You start it, you finish it all the way to black belt. Once you shake my hand the deal is sealed. I held him to that for 7 years. 

I did the same with my daughter. 

They both had their moments of wanting to quit but part of the lesson is perseverance. Sticking with something and obtaining a long term goal. 

Can't say they always loved me for it but now it is one of their biggest accomplishments and they appreciate what it taught them.

They also tend to stick with things long term. They take up other sports in terms of years not months.


----------



## EleGirl

Find some movies or cartoons that show strong women or girls who use those skills

The one that comes off the top of my head is 

Xena Warrior Princess
Wonder Woman
Charlies Angles (?????)

Power Rangers had some females .. they might be dated.


----------



## coffee4me

The next karate kid movie Where the kid is a girl my daughter loved that one


----------



## RandomDude

@Coffee 

=/

With my current co-parenting arrangements I guess I do fear her despising me if I was to push her too far into doing something she doesn't want to. And yes, you are correct that without my ex's support it's going to prove difficult.

@Norajane

But then one year could be two years no? Then 3, then 10, then OMG she's a teenager! Then 

@Elegirl

I did especially when she was younger but somehow the influences didn't stick and now she's more into the princess scene especially since Frozen came out. Even though she does get hyped in action films when asked seriously she always refuses to take it up. Xena was actually the first series I got for her and she also has tons of martial arts films with female fighters.

I dunno, for the longest time I tried to simply "accept her" especially after noticing early signs of her favor towards more traditionally feminine pastimes. But now it's becoming an increasing worry to think my little girl won't be the bad ass I want her to be where no man can touch her (and have his fingers still intact)


----------



## EleGirl

Give her time. She's going through the girly girl stage. She will go through a lot of different stages before she's grown


----------



## coffee4me

She can still be a princess and a fighter . It doesn't have to be one or the other. My daughter is a ballerina with a black belt. 

You could just take your daughter for a trial class they are usually so encouraging with little kids. Our school also offers a self defense demo for young kids that they really enjoy. They offer those things for free. Sometime with kids it's just familiarity going to a place several times and then they get comfortable and want to join in the class.


----------



## ConanHub

coffee4me said:


> She can still be a princess and a fighter . It doesn't have to be one or the other. My daughter is a ballerina with a black belt.
> 
> You could just take your daughter for a trial class they are usually so encouraging with little kids. Our school also offers a self defense demo for young kids that they really enjoy. They offer those things for free. Sometime with kids it's just familiarity going to a place several times and then they get comfortable and want to join in the class.


Absolutely. I took ballet along with judo and kenpo. Really honed my game.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## norajane

Then offer other things that could at least improve her strength. Lots of bike riding to strengthen her legs. Tennis for her arms. Maybe if she gets stronger without noticing, she'll eventually realize that she can be a princess _and _kick ass. Maybe she needs some confidence building first.


----------



## unbelievable

Stranger rape is quite a bit rarer than rapes by known associates. Teach a daughter to not associate with manipulative or disrespectful guys. Teach her to use the buddy system and not be aware if her surroundings. Teach her to not advertise anything that is not for sale. (don't be posting naked selfies, don't be dressing, talking, or behaving like a streetwalker). Think safety. Don't drive around on "empty", don't select clothes to go out in if you couldn't run or fight in them. Keep the cell phone charged and make the habit of being where you are supposed to be at the time you are supposed to be there. If you do and you are late, the cavalry will activate in your behalf. Make good female friends you can seriously trust and watch each others' backs. Whether they are rapists, muggers, car-jackers, or whatever, predators look for easy prey. Don't look like easy prey and you will avoid 90% of potential problems. For the other 10%, they'll need to devise some other action plan (like martial arts class isn't a bad idea). Women are never to blame for their own rape and it's a shame that there are evil people in the world who will take advantage of our daughters, but there are things we can do to avoid looking like an easy target. Just getting those earbuds out of your ears and acting like you are paying attention to the world is an easy way to add to your own security. Do your sleeping at home and not on a public bus or subway. Avoid telling sex jokes, sex stories, or talking provocatively to guys you aren't intimate with and especially to groups of guys. Again, don't advertise things you aren't offering to the general public. It is clearly your right to do so but it's not a safe thing to do. If you don't want just any old bass to hit your hook don't go out of your way to look like a jelly worm.


----------



## Shoto1984

EleGirl said:


> Whose talking about backsides?
> 
> How would you react to a man groping your daughter... grabbing her boobs or her crotch almost every time she got on a crowded bus? Are you ok with this?
> 
> How about a guy groping your wife's boobs and crotch... I guess you are ok with that?
> 
> Are you ok if you go somewhere with your daughter and your wife and a man does these things to them right there in front of you?


Wow what a totally inappropriate response. For the record, women have groped my butt and my crotch and kissed me so that I've had to pry them off. I've also been hit by women but never hit one back. Women get just as dumb and stupid as men do and while men generally have the ability to defend themselves against women, women's bad behavior should not be forgiven either. That's what we're after right? Respect? Fairness? I'm not sure why the concept challenged you so much but its something to think about. And you can leave my daughters out of your histerical rants. 

With that I'll leave you all to the circular firing squad this has become.


----------



## soccermom2three

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I very much agree with you, with only one little tweak. I've been with more than one woman who appreciated my assertiveness. My certainty of action. That somehow my sure pursuit, when she was unsure, was "comforting".
> 
> I know this to be true: If a male does not persuade and pursue toward his wants, he typically doesn't get laid. That right there seems to argue that women prefer such assertiveness to the guy who always seems to wimp out when she's reserved.
> 
> So "respect refusal" is a little more tricky than a simple yes or no. If I respected refusal, I would have been well into my 20s before losing my virginity. There is definite encouragement involved that should not be mistaken for disrespecting refusal.
> 
> I was raised by a single mom who repeatedly taught, "no means no". By many people's definition, I am even a rape-baby. My mom's bf at the time had sex with her while she was passed out at a party. But experience has taught me something else - that if you don't press forward in the face of resistance, NOTHING happens.
> 
> I think we should be careful to differentiate assertiveness, even persuasion, from being disrespectful of her refusal. The guys who give up at the first sign of resistance, tend to be your long time virgins.


What did I just ****ing read?

Um, yeah, I would pretty much prefer my sons not get laid than be in jail for rape. How about if a girl says no, back off. If she's playing some "I'm saying no, but mean yes", game then move on. Don't take chances.


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> Absolutely. I took ballet along with judo and kenpo. Really honed my game.


All 3 of my brothers have their black belts. Two of them are also professional dancers. They were originally trained in ballet. A good dance training is as rigorous as martial arts or more so. They used to train 8 hours a day.


----------



## EleGirl

norajane said:


> Then offer other things that could at least improve her strength. Lots of bike riding to strengthen her legs. Tennis for her arms. Maybe if she gets stronger without noticing, she'll eventually realize that she can be a princess _and _kick ass. Maybe she needs some confidence building first.


:iagree: Bowling.. my step daughter has bowled a lot all her life. Done right and often enough it builds muscles.


----------



## EleGirl

unbelievable said:


> Stranger rape is quite a bit rarer than rapes by known associates. Teach a daughter to not associate with manipulative or disrespectful guys. Teach her to use the buddy system and not be aware if her surroundings. Teach her to not advertise anything that is not for sale. (don't be posting naked selfies, don't be dressing, talking, or behaving like a streetwalker). Think safety. Don't drive around on "empty", don't select clothes to go out in if you couldn't run or fight in them. Keep the cell phone charged and make the habit of being where you are supposed to be at the time you are supposed to be there. If you do and you are late, the cavalry will activate in your behalf. Make good female friends you can seriously trust and watch each others' backs. Whether they are rapists, muggers, car-jackers, or whatever, predators look for easy prey. Don't look like easy prey and you will avoid 90% of potential problems. For the other 10%, they'll need to devise some other action plan (like martial arts class isn't a bad idea). Women are never to blame for their own rape and it's a shame that there are evil people in the world who will take advantage of our daughters, but there are things we can do to avoid looking like an easy target. Just getting those earbuds out of your ears and acting like you are paying attention to the world is an easy way to add to your own security. Do your sleeping at home and not on a public bus or subway. Avoid telling sex jokes, sex stories, or talking provocatively to guys you aren't intimate with and especially to groups of guys. Again, don't advertise things you aren't offering to the general public. It is clearly your right to do so but it's not a safe thing to do. If you don't want just any old bass to hit your hook don't go out of your way to look like a jelly worm.


Yep, that's what we have all been taught and what we have taught our children.


----------



## EleGirl

Shoto1984 said:


> Wow what a totally inappropriate response. For the record, women have groped my butt and my crotch and kissed me so that I've had to pry them off. I've also been hit by women but never hit one back. Women get just as dumb and stupid as men do and while men generally have the ability to defend themselves against women, women's bad behavior should not be forgiven either. That's what we're after right? Respect? Fairness? I'm not sure why the concept challenged you so much but its something to think about. And you can leave my daughters out of your histerical rants.
> 
> With that I'll leave you all to the circular firing squad this has become.


I agree with you that when women act badly, they need to face the consequences for it. 100% behind that.

However, in response to a discussion of groping, you said the following:



Shoto1984 said:


> So when women have grabbed my back side I was being sexually assaulted in that I hadn't given consent. I never thought of myself as a victim but wrong is wrong. Hmmmm.


Basically that groping is no big deal as you don't mind being groped by women. so you are basically tell us women here that we are making too much out of groping.

So I put made it personal to you to see if you thought it was making too much out of groping when it came to women you care about.


EleGirl said:


> Whose talking about backsides?
> 
> How would you react to a man groping your daughter... grabbing her boobs or her crotch almost every time she got on a crowded bus? Are you ok with this?
> 
> How about a guy groping your wife's boobs and crotch... I guess you are ok with that?
> 
> Are you ok if you go somewhere with your daughter and your wife and a man does these things to them right there in front of you?


----------



## Shoto1984

EleGirl said:


> However, in response to a discussion of groping, you said the following:
> 
> Basically that groping is no big deal as you don't mind being groped by women. so you are basically tell us women here that we are making too much out of groping.
> 
> So I put made it personal to you to see if you thought it was making too much out of groping when it came to women you care about.


As I said, completely inappropriate. What you assumed my meaning to be and what it was were completely different. You assigned sarcasm where there was none. The point was fairness and if we're going to do this right then everyone who has these things happen without consent is a victim....even me which I hadn't considered previously.

So you made it personal and made it personal.


----------



## RandomDude

@Coffee/Nora/Ele

Yeah guess exposing her to a trial class could work, or even make her decide that it's not for her! Argh! I'm hoping the girly stage will die down too but considering most of her friends are female and ex has her most of the week... feels like I'm fighting an uphill battle.

Funny really, when she was born I thought THIS would happen:










Oh well, one can only dream now...


----------



## EleGirl

RandomDude said:


> @Coffee/Nora/Ele
> 
> Yeah guess exposing her to a trial class could work, or even make her decide that it's not for her! Argh! I'm hoping the girly stage will die down too but considering most of her friends are female and ex has her most of the week... feels like I'm fighting an uphill battle.
> 
> Funny really, when she was born I thought THIS would happen:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well, one can only dream now...


LOL.... Love the picture.... I'll bet she loves doing things with her daddy. Get some martial arts workout/practice videos and do them when she's with you. Get her some cool ninja outfits in pink, etc... let her be the girly girl ninja


----------



## EleGirl

Shoto1984 said:


> As I said, completely inappropriate. What you assumed my meaning to be and what it was were completely different. You assigned sarcasm where there was none. The point was fairness and if we're going to do this right then everyone who has these things happen without consent is a victim....even me which I hadn't considered previously.
> 
> So you made it personal and made it personal.


Perhaps it would work better if you clearly stated what you meant.

I agree that it should be the same for everyone. I have no problem with that.


----------



## RandomDude

EleGirl said:


> LOL.... Love the picture.... I'll bet she loves doing things with her daddy. Get some martial arts workout/practice videos and do them when she's with you. Get her some cool ninja outfits in pink, etc... let her be the girly girl ninja


Yes, she sure does enjoy... loosening my wrists 

I'm sure she would enjoy the dressup, but getting her to be a ninja, nah I want her to take martial arts seriously too, its fun and I don't want her to be a monk but I don't want her to take the discipline as a joke either, or just acting.

Nah, I want her to at least have a fighter's instinct by age 14. Currently though she doesn't have much motivation; she has no bullies in school or at church, in fact she's the "bully", but always verbal. I had parents come up to me during church to complain that my daughter made their son cry like a little girl. But hearing her side, she's just like daddy who likes to tease and take the piss outta everything - in good spirits.


----------



## Pollo

EleGirl said:


> We teach our children that it is wrong to steal, kill, assault, and so forth. So yes we can and do teach people to not commit crimes. What do you think parents do when they raise children.
> 
> And of course men can be taught to not rape and to not think that they have the right to do anything they want to anther person if they want to.
> 
> We can teach boys (who grow into men) that rape is not funny. Rape jokes are not funny. That groping women is not acceptable.


We also teach kids to stay away from potentially dangerous situations because people are completely aware that crimes are not a positive thing, so "educating" them about it doesn't do much. The best way to stay out of trouble is to find ways of avoiding it.

If someone walks into a dark alley in a bad part of town with thousand dollar bills in their hands everyone would call that person an idiot. You don't hear screams saying that we need to educate people to not commit crimes. 
People are trying to turn this into a sexism topic when it isn't one.


----------



## EleGirl

Pollo said:


> We also teach kids to stay away from potentially dangerous situations because people are completely aware that crimes are not a positive thing, so "educating" them about it doesn't do much. The best way to stay out of trouble is to find ways of avoiding it.
> 
> If someone walks into a dark alley in a bad part of town with thousand dollar bills in their hands everyone would call that person an idiot. You don't hear screams saying that we need to educate people to not commit crimes.
> People are trying to turn this into a sexism topic when it isn't one.


Ah, you come into a conversations days late ....

We have already talked about the things that women are taught and do to avoid dangerous situations.

90% of rapes are done in the home. Only 10% of rapes are outside the home. Most rapes are carried out by people who the woman knows and trusts. Very few rapes are by strangers.

So of course we all expect women to take precautions.

But there is more that can be done. On this thread, we are talking about what else can be done.

We do teach children not to steal, not to murder, etc. We learn it in school. We learn it in religious study. When our child takes something off the shelf in a store and tries to eat it, we tell them that it has not been paid for and they cannot eat it yet.

No one is trying to turn this into a sexist topic. We are trying to talk about the things, besides educating women on how to protect themselves that can be done.... like educating boys.


----------



## john117

badsanta said:


> Most important is the "presence" of the girl's father that a boy is dating, along with his gut reaction if a boy will be trusted to date his daughter. This often involves a moment alone a prospective boyfriend will have to endure with the girl's father before they he is allowed to date her. Odds are nothing sexual is discussed, but more of an overall assessment of character as well as a show of force such as him carrying the proverbial shotgun.



The guy who's dating my older girl (22.5) still texts me and asks my permission to take her out on a date... He has done it for 5 years. Great kid. He has awesome parents too.

He survived the initial screening interview 5 years ago.


----------



## RandomDude

john117 said:


> The guy who's dating my older girl (22.5) still texts me and asks my permission to take her out on a date... He has done it for 5 years. Great kid. He has awesome parents too.
> 
> He survived the initial screening interview 5 years ago.


This is a good standard to hold my daughter's future dates to actually. Unfortunately I am a bit paranoid of men like who I was in my youth however, who may be difficult to deal with considering they'll say things to my daughter like "you're your own woman" inspiring my daughter to rebel against her family etc. As such I try to be as uncontrolling as possible throughout my fatherhood career.

Still... grrrr...


----------



## Shoto1984

EleGirl said:


> Perhaps it would work better if you clearly stated what you meant.
> 
> I agree that it should be the same for everyone. I have no problem with that.


It would work even better if you didn't assume so much and asked for clarificeation rather then running off on a self righeous rant. Beyond that me having to state every detail robs you of the thought process and the intellecual discovery. In this case that understanding yourself as victim (men) perhaps helps you see others as victim (women) in simillar situations.


----------



## tulsy

john117 said:


> The guy who's dating my older girl (22.5) still texts me and asks my permission to take her out on a date... He has done it for 5 years. Great kid. He has awesome parents too.
> 
> He survived the initial screening interview 5 years ago.


After 5 years, I think it's a little weird. 

At this point, isn't it your adult daughters decision who and when she dates? 

Really, it seems strange to me. 5 years and he still asks her dad for permission to date his adult daughter.


----------



## RandomDude

It's a sign of respect, they aren't married yet


----------



## SadSamIAm

soccermom2three said:


> What did I just ****ing read?
> 
> Um, yeah, I would pretty much prefer my sons not get laid than be in jail for rape. How about if a girl says no, back off. If she's playing some "I'm saying no, but mean yes", game then move on. Don't take chances.


Many, many girls play hard to get. At least they did 30 years ago when I was 18 years old. I am guessing it hasn't changed all too much.

It wasn't appropriate for girls to be 'easy'. Guys were supposed to try for second base and girls were supposed to turn you down. It was all part of the game. 

Typically scenario, is a couple making out. The guy puts his hand on her breast, she moves it away. He does it again, she moves it away. More making out and she is undoing her blouse. Happened all the time. But to be clear, if she pushed your hand away and meant it, it was pretty apparent. The entire body language changes. 

Still happens to this day with my wife. I crawl into bed with her and hug her. After a while I start to caress a naughty area and get asked to stop. Sometimes I stop and all is good. Sometimes I carry on and all is good. Sometimes I stop and she says, Why did you stop? Duh!!! All part of the game and all part of the reason guys say they will never understand women.


----------



## Healer

norajane said:


> With 1 out of 5 college girls being raped or sexually assaulted, _somebody _has sons - whom they are sending to college - who apparently DO need to be taught not to rape and otherwise sexually assault women.


Somebody has sons who do all sorts of heinous, horrible, illegal, ****ed up stuff. Obviously - psychopaths and criminals have parents.


----------



## Healer

tacoma said:


> I refuse to teach my sons "Not to rape"
> 
> The insinuation disgusts me as does the college level SJW's who promote this crap.
> 
> Teach your children about personal boundaries and respect for human life and volition and they cannot mistake that rape is wrong when compared in that context.
> 
> Do you specifically teach your sons not to murder?
> Do you teach them specifically not to embezzle?


Exactly.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Sam, all of that crap has changed and women are being taught what enthusiastic consent is so they can state and own what they want. There is no longer any room for ambiguity, only YES means YES.


----------



## norajane

Faithful Wife said:


> Sam, all of that crap has changed and women are being taught what enthusiastic consent is so they can state and own what they want. There is no longer any room for ambiguity, only YES means YES.


I hope boys are taught that, too, because if boys think they have to push to get to second base (and they clearly do, based on the comments in this thread, especially the one about reluctant virgins and young men not being able to get laid until their 20's if they don't push their way in), _it's not enough for just the girl to understand that Yes means Yes._


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anon Pink said:


> So, you subscribe to the old, "no blood no foul" thing?


I'm sorry, I made a mistake. I took the thread title "teach sons not to rape" and created a context in my mind of two teens making out, he pushes boundaries and she claims its rape because she didn't stick to her boundaries. What happened to me.

I wasn't thinking of an armed scenario, or even stranger, as the thread title implies to me a desire to increase awareness among those who aren't seeking to rape or aware of it being wrong. I excluded the armed rape from my context, because the armed rapist certainly knows what he's doing - so teaching him not to rape doesn't make sense. He's made a choice to rape.

I see that I narrowed the context of the discussion to the cases where her interest is somewhat ambiguous -nothing really explicit, passive resistance that turns into full participation. The boundary pushing scenario is the sort of rape I was accused of as a teen. The "I said no, but he didn't stop". It's more like, "you said no when I started to transition to intercourse; I adjusted by continuing to make out and build more tension, before making another attempt to transition... which wasn't resisted, but wholly accepted and pursued." I can't help but see everything through this lens, and how easy it was for a girl to claim rape when nothing of the sort occurred. My thoughts were that if she didn't want to be there, she could have gotten up and left at any time. I wasn't armed. I forced nothing. Everyone knew I was seeing her. Her family knew I was out with her that night. Fighting in that scenario makes sense to me if you're being raped. Evidence of force.

I brought my own baggage into the discussion and threw it around haphazardly. I really have no comment on other rape scenarios. I just despise that when it comes to rape accusations like my case, it's more like guilty until proven innocent. And even when the accuser recants, the accusation is sticky. You're permanently the guy someone said raped them. I was fortunate to move soon after.

There's a sudden flurry of rape cases in the news lately (some from the distant past), and frankly I'm skeptical. All these stories about how so many in law enforcement don't take rape seriously, or rapes coming to light years after the fact; -well from my perspective, they took it pretty damn seriously.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> Soo... I think that women need to get a lot smarter. We need to just quit having sex with men until there is a signed contract of agreement and a video/audio tape running at all time. That would work very well.


Awesome! I always have video rolling. :smthumbup: jk

But another way to reduce rape is to legalize prostitution. No, really.

When Rhode Island accidentally legalized prostitution, rape decreased sharply - The Washington Post

This was an unintentional case, but the same has been shown of intentional legalization with regulation.


----------



## SpinDaddy

Anon Pink said:


> According to popular opinion, women need to learn to protect themselves from men who might be rapists. You know, other than general safety stuff, how is a woman supposed to know if a man is a friendly guy or if he is isolating her to overpower and rape her? Is the coach being nice offering her a ride home or is he kidnapping her? Was the hand on my ass a result of the subway car momentum or did that guy just cop a cheap feel? Impossible!
> 
> So what do you parents of sons teach, explain and show your sons about the difference between trying to convince her to have sex with you and coercing her? How many of you have actually told your sons not to cop a cheap feel even if she is passed out? How many of you have actually explained the difference between taking the lead in sexual play and just plain taking?
> 
> What do you tell your sons?


*Howdy Anon!*

This is a good question, it’s given me some pause for thoughtful consideration and discussion with Ms. Spin. 

We may be the odd ones here but we do not and will not probably ever per se “teach our son not to rape”. We are very comfortable in our approach to teach, raise and serve as role models to both our children in abiding by and embracing fundamental Judeo-Christian ethics and morality. And in that sense, unwelcomedly forcing ones will upon another is wrong regardless of the context – sexual or otherwise.

Mind you, we are not fundamentalist nor Bible thumpers but firmly believe the higher standards by which Ms. Spin and I operate the Spin household under address the stated concern – not just with regard to SpinBoy but SpinGirl as well.

Now, on the other hand, both Ms. Spin and I admittedly feel that in many regards we have not been so good in teaching the other side the equation to this concern – not letting yourself become the victim. 

And I think unfortunately, that is a consequence of living by a higher code when others clearly do not. But there again – being cautious, suspicious of circumstances and intentions, not letting yourself be susceptible to being taken advantage of – these notions are not limited to just matters of a sexual nature.

That’s what we think. Thanks for the thought provoking question Anon!


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> I agree that women need to say NO, STOP, etc loud and clear. And that if fighting back does not put them in danger of losing their lives or putting them in a comma for the rest of their lives, they need to fight back like cats (those big jungle cats).
> 
> But there are rapes, that are clearly rapes, that lead to no visible injury... like my friend with the knife to her throat.


You're right of course. And I apologize for my baggage eating up more space than it should have.


----------



## Anon Pink

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I'm sorry, I made a mistake. I took the thread title "teach sons not to rape" and created a context in my mind of two teens making out, he pushes boundaries and she claims its rape because she didn't stick to her boundaries. What happened to me.
> 
> I wasn't thinking of an armed scenario, or even stranger, as the thread title implies to me a desire to increase awareness among those who aren't seeking to rape or aware of it being wrong. I excluded the armed rape from my context, because the armed rapist certainly knows what he's doing - so teaching him not to rape doesn't make sense. He's made a choice to rape.
> 
> I see that I narrowed the context of the discussion to the cases where her interest is somewhat ambiguous -nothing really explicit, passive resistance that turns into full participation.
> 
> *The boundary pushing scenario is the sort of rape I was accused of as a teen. The "I said no, but he didn't stop". It's more like, "you said no when I started to transition to intercourse; I adjusted by continuing to make out and build more tension, before making another attempt to transition... which wasn't resisted, but wholly accepted and pursued."* I can't help but see everything through this lens, and how easy it was for a girl to claim rape when nothing of the sort occurred. My thoughts were that if she didn't want to be there, she could have gotten up and left at any time. I wasn't armed. I forced nothing. Everyone knew I was seeing her. Her family knew I was out with her that night. Fighting in that scenario makes sense to me if you're being raped. Evidence of force.
> 
> I brought my own baggage into the discussion and threw it around haphazardly. I really have no comment on other rape scenarios. I just despise that when it comes to rape accusations like my case, it's more like guilty until proven innocent. And even when the accuser recants, the accusation is sticky. You're permanently the guy someone said raped them. I was fortunate to move soon after.
> 
> There's a sudden flurry of rape cases in the news lately (some from the distant past), and frankly I'm skeptical. All these stories about how so many in law enforcement don't take rape seriously, or rapes coming to light years after the fact; -well from my perspective, they took it pretty damn seriously.


The bolded part above is exactly the scenario I had in mind when I started this thread.

Do you mind answering some questions about your evening with this girl?

1. Were either of you drinking or drugging that night?

2. How long had you dated her?

3. How old were you and how old was she?

4. How much experience with boys had she had prior to you? Had any prior boy, or you, touched her breasts, touched her genital area? Was she a virgin?

5. When she said no, you backed off, but only to go back to her comfort level in order to ease her into having sex? You didn't talk about her no? 

6. Where were you two when this happened?


----------



## SadSamIAm

Anon Pink said:


> The bolded part above is exactly the scenario I had in mind when I started this thread.
> 
> Do you mind answering some questions about your evening with this girl?
> 
> 1. Were either of you drinking or drugging that night?
> 
> 2. How long had you dated her?
> 
> 3. How old were you and how old was she?
> 
> 4. How much experience with boys had she had prior to you? Had any prior boy, or you, touched her breasts, touched her genital area? Was she a virgin?
> 
> 5. When she said no, you backed off, but only to go back to her comfort level in order to ease her into having sex? You didn't talk about her no?
> 
> 6. Where were you two when this happened?


I take offense to these questions. Has nothing to do with the discussion.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

ConanHub said:


> Interesting sexual history. I never had to push. They all were very clear in wanting me or were quite aggressive. None of them even took the time for protection. I did not get into "taking" a woman until with my wife for a while. Lost my virginity to a very aggressive sex hound when I was 14. I think pushy is a bit dangerous with a newer partner.


Pushy is the wrong word. Escalating is a better word. Advancing. Making a move. Virgins are not sexually aggressive. The virgins I've been with each required a gradual easing back of their restrictions. Nudges toward sex, but not pushy.

When I was a teen, I learned the difference between getting laid and not getting laid (for me) was ultimately whether I made overt advances or not. The more assertive I was, the more successful. My prior passive and reserved behavior was a flop, and I didn't lose my virginity until I met "a very aggressive sex hound" 2 years older than me when I was 17.

Taking action and advancing was critical in my late teens. Girls were all wishy washy. By 19, I learned that if I didn't do anything, nothing usually happened, or it took forever to happen. Same thing I discovered about getting dates - if I don't make bold moves and take chances, I don't get the dates I want.

In college, women in my dating pool eased up. Sex occurred significantly sooner than it did prior and I didn't have to nudge. Sex in 1-3 dates vs 1-3 months of dating. You could rely on her making a move. Today it's the same, all I'm really doing is reading signals and building tension. I can wait, because it's not taking long. Whereas when I was younger it took really being bold, today I'm usually not the one to make the first sexually explicit act. But I've still usually set it up to make that jump with a lot of suggestive touch, teasing and comfort building conversation. But she's the first to go for the pants button.

If you don't have to do anything, and had/have a satisfying love life, more power to you. I've always had to at least set the stage.

I have to say I prefer seeking and advancing to waiting though. Then I feel like I had a greater influence on the outcome... surely a control thing, but better than feeling like I'm passively sitting back while she makes up her mind if I'm worthy or not.


----------



## Anon Pink

SadSamIAm said:


> I take offense to these questions. Has nothing to do with the discussion.


It has EVERYTHING to do with this discussion!

Why do you take offense to those question?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Nora, yes boys are being taught that only yes means yes also. But I was specifically responding to Sam's post above mine. It is true that men and women both have had confusion about sex in those early encounters but we don't need any confusion when everyone understands enthusiastic consent.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Ugh...I can't continue reading and hear about pushing and escalating, it is sickening. 

Thank you for what you are trying to do here Anon. Sadly, I think you just stepped in a huge pile of crap.


----------



## that.girl

Dvl, i feel like there's a critical difference in your case - she said yes, and later lied about it. That's not rape, that's lying to CYA.
The consent question comes into play when the girl does not say yes or no, and does not actively participate. She may be drunk, or scared, or whatever. It might not make sense to guys, but it happens. Some girls just freeze because they don't have the tools to handle the situation. 
So then the boy feels like he did nothing wrong (she didn't say no), and the girl feels violated (I didn't say yes).


----------



## Anon Pink

No! She didn't say YES. What she said was NO. Then was pushed into sex! She didn't say yes!

Pushy is the correct word. You aren't waiting for the girl to be on board, you're waiting for her to be indecisive enough that you can push for more. You have a long history of sex without consent. So I totally understand your murkiness on this issue AND you emphatic disgust with requiring consent.





You did that Dlvs! You did the same fvcking thing!


----------



## that.girl

Didn't she later admit that she lied?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anon Pink said:


> The bolded part above is exactly the scenario I had in mind when I started this thread.
> 
> Do you mind answering some questions about your evening with this girl?
> 
> 1. Were either of you drinking or drugging that night?


Nope. She was the wholesome type from a religious family. Super cute, super naïve. She had never had a drink in her life. I was her bad boy. I smoked and kept my druggie mess on the down low. I was not however, drunk or high that night. It was an ordinary movie date.



Anon Pink said:


> 2. How long had you dated her?


2 months I think.



Anon Pink said:


> 3. How old were you and how old was she?


I was 18, she was 16. Yes, legal in our state.



Anon Pink said:


> 4. How much experience with boys had she had prior to you? Had any prior boy, or you, touched her breasts, touched her genital area? Was she a virgin?


Her longest relationship had been 3 months, and the most she had done was kissed.



Anon Pink said:


> 5. When she said no, you backed off, but only to go back to her comfort level in order to ease her into having sex? You didn't talk about her no?


Correct. The no wasn't a hostile no. It's hard to describe in text. It was like a playful, "ah ah ah" *finger shaking* "naughty boy" or "not so fast mister" sort of no. Something I'd heard a lot of because I was always just barely pushing the line... like edging my hand a little higher up her thigh on a date and getting shot down. Then the next date, that spot on her thigh is allowed. She did initially shut me down before having sex, but I read that the boundary was getting fuzzier by the second. After shutting me down, she went right back to making out with me - and I thought nothing else of it. So I went back to what I was doing, believing the line would be gone soon enough. I mean, we were basically dry humping... I knew she was about to "crack" if you will. When I went for her pants button again, she didn't stop me. She pulled my shirt up to get it off. She very much participated in her undressing (c'mon, we're in the car). She had more reservations but we kept making out. I eventually pressed in and there were no more reservations.

On the way to drop her off at home, she kept saying she was so nervous... and felt like everyone will be able to tell what she just did. She also said "we're doing that again."

It wasn't even remotely rape. I learned from a mutual friend that she didn't mean to say she was raped. Her parents found out because she blabbed to friends and they confronted her, gave her the whole shame and sin speech. She pushed it on me - that I pushed and pushed and she said no... and her parents read "rape". So began the roller coaster.



Anon Pink said:


> 6. Where were you two when this happened?


Parked at a secluded beach/campsite.


----------



## norajane

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Pushy is the wrong word. Escalating is a better word. Advancing. Making a move. Virgins are not sexually aggressive. The virgins I've been with each required a gradual easing back of their restrictions. Nudges toward sex, but not pushy.


When I was a virgin, I talked with my boyfriend about having sex, shared my thoughts and concerns, he shared his, prepared with birth control, and we planned our first night together. 

NO PUSHING OR PRODDING OR NUDGING OR ESCALATING WAS INVOLVED OR NECESSARY, NOR DID I WANT TO BE PUSHED OR PRODDED OR NUDGED OR ESCALATED.

This is exactly the wrong message to teach boys - that they have to push their girlfriends into having sex when they aren't ready for it. This is how they get into trouble when they push and don't even know what they did wrong because they were just following what Unlce Dvl told them to do with reluctant virgins or they won't get laid until they are 17.



> When I was a teen, I learned the difference between getting laid and not getting laid (for me) was ultimately whether I made overt advances or not. The more assertive I was, the more successful. My prior passive and reserved behavior was a flop, and I didn't lose my virginity until I met "a very aggressive sex hound" 2 years older than me when I was 17.


Yeah, I'm not going to feel sorry for any teenager who has to wait until their partner is actually ready to have sex with them. No one is OWED sex when they want it just because they want it now. 

And why call this young woman a sex hound? Why not call her an awesome young woman who was enthusiastic about having sex with you? Why do you have to put her down?


----------



## Cletus

The first time I had sex with my teenage girlfriend was the night she begged me to do it, and I still hemmed, hawed, and resisted for an hour until I was satisfied that she understood what she was asking. 

The first time I had sex with my wife was on our wedding night, and I think consent was implied with the request that we take a short nap first. 

So I guess I'm just not that familiar with the escalation method.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

that.girl said:


> Dvl, i feel like there's a critical difference in your case - she said yes, and later lied about it. That's not rape, that's lying to CYA.
> The consent question comes into play when the girl does not say yes or no, and does not actively participate. She may be drunk, or scared, or whatever. It might not make sense to guys, but it happens. Some girls just freeze because they don't have the tools to handle the situation.
> So then the boy feels like he did nothing wrong (she didn't say no), and the girl feels violated (I didn't say yes).


She never explicitly said "yes". In fact, I'm not sure any woman I've had sex with has explicitly said "yes". It's done by action. If you take my shirt off and then help me get your pants off, and hold your legs up while I get your panties off I'm going to take that as a solid "yes".



that.girl said:


> Didn't she later admit that she lied?


She did. I think the cops had another interview with her or something, but I'm told she messed her story up and they were mean and she cracked. I don't think she meant for it to really go as far as it did. I think she just wanted to escape her parents judgment, and they ran with it.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
IMHO, a woman who gives unclear / inconsistent signals deserves to be alone.

I would absolutely not tolerate a woman who expected me to figure out which "no" was for real, and which wasn't - with a felony rape charge waiting for me if I guess wrong. I'll find someone who makes her interest completely clear. 

Needless to say, BDSM play by pre-arranged discussion is completely fine. If someone wants to be ravished, that's great, just be sure everyone is on the same page.







SadSamIAm said:


> Many, many girls play hard to get. At least they did 30 years ago when I was 18 years old. I am guessing it hasn't changed all too much.
> 
> It wasn't appropriate for girls to be 'easy'. Guys were supposed to try for second base and girls were supposed to turn you down. It was all part of the game.
> 
> Typically scenario, is a couple making out. The guy puts his hand on her breast, she moves it away. He does it again, she moves it away. More making out and she is undoing her blouse. Happened all the time. But to be clear, if she pushed your hand away and meant it, it was pretty apparent. The entire body language changes.
> 
> Still happens to this day with my wife. I crawl into bed with her and hug her. After a while I start to caress a naughty area and get asked to stop. Sometimes I stop and all is good. Sometimes I carry on and all is good. Sometimes I stop and she says, Why did you stop? Duh!!! All part of the game and all part of the reason guys say they will never understand women.


----------



## SadSamIAm

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Pushy is the wrong word. Escalating is a better word. Advancing. Making a move. Virgins are not sexually aggressive. The virgins I've been with each required a gradual easing back of their restrictions. Nudges toward sex, but not pushy.
> 
> When I was a teen, I learned the difference between getting laid and not getting laid (for me) was ultimately whether I made overt advances or not. The more assertive I was, the more successful. My prior passive and reserved behavior was a flop, and I didn't lose my virginity until I met "a very aggressive sex hound" 2 years older than me when I was 17.
> 
> Taking action and advancing was critical in my late teens. Girls were all wishy washy. By 19, I learned that if I didn't do anything, nothing usually happened, or it took forever to happen. Same thing I discovered about getting dates - if I don't make bold moves and take chances, I don't get the dates I want.
> 
> In college, women in my dating pool eased up. Sex occurred significantly sooner than it did prior and I didn't have to nudge. Sex in 1-3 dates vs 1-3 months of dating. You could rely on her making a move. Today it's the same, all I'm really doing is reading signals and building tension. I can wait, because it's not taking long. Whereas when I was younger it took really being bold, today I'm usually not the one to make the first sexually explicit act. But I've still usually set it up to make that jump with a lot of suggestive touch, teasing and comfort building conversation. But she's the first to go for the pants button.
> 
> If you don't have to do anything, and had/have a satisfying love life, more power to you. I've always had to at least set the stage.
> 
> I have to say I prefer seeking and advancing to waiting though. Then I feel like I had a greater influence on the outcome... surely a control thing, but better than feeling like I'm passively sitting back while she makes up her mind if I'm worthy or not.


I like the way you explained this. 

I think the way it was when I was young added to the experience. The whole butterflies in the stomach thing.

Faithful Wife says it is no longer like this. Kind of sad in some ways.

I have slept with 12 girls in my life. The first 11 were from before I met my wife at 21 years old - the 12th being my wife. Four out of the twelve were aggressive and didn't need any coaxing on my part. 

Just to be clear, the 8 that did need coaxing were all consensual. I don't believe any of them felt assaulted or raped or even taken advantage of. I believe they were good experiences for both of us.


----------



## that.girl

I agree that sometimes consent can be implied by clear actions. 
Young men often believe that silence is consent. Young women don't understand this, and think their silence is refusal. 
THAT is what we need to explain to our children. The situation is about more than "no means no," and we need to Mahe sure young people understand that.


----------



## always_alone

norajane said:


> NO PUSHING OR PRODDING OR NUDGING OR ESCALATING WAS INVOLVED OR NECESSARY, NOR DID I WANT TO BE PUSHED OR PRODDED OR NUDGED OR ESCALATED.


Yes, this whole attitude of "push til you get to yes, it's all part of the game" is a huge part of the problem, IMHO. 

It asserts one's objectives as more important than the other person's.

We teach kids not to bully, pressure or manipulate others all the time. How is this any different?


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
It may be that "pushing" has a different meaning for different people.

I don't see anything wrong with either person initiating intimate activities. A gradual progression towards more sexual activities is fine IF the other person is giving some signs of consent. Now what constitutes "signs of consent" is a little murky.

A "no" clearly indicates non-consent. If she didn't really mean stop, then she needs to clarify, or she doesn't get sex that day.

Physical resistance clearly indicates non-consent unless there are some clear words from her to counteract that. ("I want you to Fxxx me" said while struggling IS consent).

Passively lying there is borderline. Is she lying there too terrified to do or say anything? Is she lying there passively enjoying the attention? Its usually obvious. I think though for it to be rape she needs to have in some way indicated that she didn't want things to proceed.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anon Pink said:


> No! She didn't say YES. What she said was NO. Then was pushed into sex! She didn't say yes!
> 
> Pushy is the correct word. You aren't waiting for the girl to be on board, you're waiting for her to be indecisive enough that you can push for more. You have a long history of sex without consent. So I totally understand your murkiness on this issue AND you emphatic disgust with requiring consent.


BS. It's not my responsibility to make sure she upholds her boundaries. If she didn't want to have sex, she didn't have to help me undress her.



Anon Pink said:


> At this point, you are the guy who raped me when I was 15. You are the SOB who got me drunk, made out with me in his car, pulled down my pantyhose and panties and forced himself inside me, all while I was frozen in fear.


False. I didn't get her drunk. 

That you mixed your signals is not his fault. What did you think making out is a lead up to? Your actions are saying yes, so he continues. Your freezing up doesn't tell him anything.

Do I think a college kid should be with a 15 year old? No. In most states that's statutory rape.



Anon Pink said:


> I didn't say no. I didn't say yes. I was utterly and completely frozen. I couldn't understand why he was taking off my pantyhose? Why would a boy want to do that? I didn't want him to do that but I had no language to say that? He was older than me, in college, I really liked him but I was too afraid to stop him. He would laugh at me, he would tell me I'm a baby and I need to grow up. I didn't know that boys wanted to touch girls that way? That was gross why would they want that? I was 15 and a virgin! I had kissed boys but that was it. I didn't know ANYTHING about sex I didn't know what I was supposed to do? I totally fvcking froze! It hurt! A lot! When I got inside my house I threw up, then pulled off my pantyhose and panties and there was blood everywhere. I thought I had gotten my period. I didn't even know what that fvcking blood was all about!
> 
> You did that Dlvs! You did the same fvcking thing!


Not at all similar to my case, nor any virgin I've been with. Firstly, there's never been blood all over the place. In fact, only one showed any blood at all. Each time was slow, and none described it afterward as painful. Each made it known that they wanted to do it again. The only one that never happened again was the rape accuser.

You've obviously felt the experience was traumatic and I'm sorry about that. None of the virgins I've been with thought so.

I'd suggest your post indicates that you should have been taught more about sex. The teaching of girls, not boys. Besides the age difference, I don't see anything he should have done differently. It's not his responsibility to enforce your boundaries. At any point, you could have said no. You didn't because of your fear of judgment. That's not a flaw in his character. He can't read your mind. All he knows is he has an active participant making out with him who isn't stopping his advances. He knew what he wanted and thought he had a willing partner.

I'm glad the violent rape issue is out of the way though, because this is what I thought this thread was supposed to be about, and how I was engaging it.

If not for statutory rape, there is no way I can consider the guy in this example a rapist.


----------



## Shoto1984

Just to throw more fuel on the fire... I dated a woman who engaged in foreplay with me but when the it came to the "moment of truth" she would say "no" and struggle. I would stop and resume foreplay. Repeat this a few times and it was really confusing me. yes yes yes then no no no. Finally I figured I was moving ahead unless she gave me more of a fight then she had ie she could have been shredding me with her nails or biting me etc. Long story short...I did...she didn't. Afterward I mentioned to her that it was a dangerous game to play and she responded "you we're going to get it till you took it". Not easy being the male sometimes.


----------



## norajane

Shoto1984 said:


> Just to throw more fuel on the fire... I dated a woman who engaged in foreplay with me but when the it came to the "moment of truth" *she would say "no" and struggle.* I would stop and resume foreplay. Repeat this a few times and it was really confusing me. yes yes yes then no no no. Finally I figured I was moving ahead unless she gave me more of a fight then she had ie she could have been shredding me with her nails or biting me etc. Long story short...I did...she didn't. Afterward I mentioned to her that it was a dangerous game to play and she responded "you we're going to get it till you took it". Not easy being the male sometimes.


Why didn't you stop when she said no and struggled? Why didn't you stop and tell her that there would be no sex until she wanted it and didn't struggle against you?

Why didn't you stop and then look for a more enthusiastic partner who wouldn't say no and struggle _at any point_?


----------



## Anonymous07

richardsharpe said:


> I think though for it to be rape she needs to have in some way indicated that she didn't want things to proceed.


I disagree. 

I know a co-worker/friend who is the very shy, quiet, reserved type of woman. She was raped when she was 17 and never said the word "no" nor did anything to stop the guy. She was terrified and just froze, not knowing what to do. She just laid there with a blank face and after he was done with her, cried her eyes out. This was with her "boyfriend" at the time who took advantage of her. She was a virgin and did not want to have sex. 

My story could have been like hers(virgin, bf tried to rape me), but I somehow fought like crazy to get him off of me. I could have easily been like the above story though. 

I think guys need to learn that in order for sex to happen the woman needs to be enthusiastic about it or else it should not happen. If she says no, then stop, even if you think she is being "playful". If she is just laying there, stop and back away. 

If a woman pushes her husband's hand away from her breast and he keeps putting it back there, maybe she just gave up and let him have his way. It doesn't mean she actually wants it. 

A guy should never have to coax, persuade, push, nudge a woman into having sex. If she isn't giving it freely, then move on!


----------



## john117

RandomDude said:


> It's a sign of respect, they aren't married yet



In earlier years dating my girl involved a "sacrificial" carry out order for dad as well  

We go out once in a while for dinner and I pick up the tab. He's a good kid, very wealthy, educated, etc but thanks to my daughters college plans they will likely go another 5 years dating before marriage... 

Asking started when they were in high school and had school work to deal with. I don't always get asked, generally during finals only. But the kid does respect me and I like that.


----------



## Cletus

norajane said:


> Why didn't you stop when she said no and struggled? Why didn't you stop and tell her that there would be no sex until she wanted it and didn't struggle against you?
> 
> Why didn't you stop and then look for a more enthusiastic partner who wouldn't say no and struggle _at any point_?


Now that's not completely fair either. This particular girl _wanted_ the struggle. He was treating her as she wanted to be treated.

The only problem is that this approach is not wanted by most women, so it's not universally applicable, and even dangerous. But in this individual case, it was exactly what she wanted to have happen. 

Sure it would have been better if she had said "You'll have to take it if you want it" ahead of time. But the point of signals being ambiguous is valid, which is why it is ALWAYS incumbent on those involved making their wishes known, without requiring the aggressor to guess about or to extract them. 

After 30 years, I still fail at reading my wife's mind when she isn't being up front about something. It's a dangerous business, trying to infer hidden meaning.


----------



## Anonymous07

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> What did you think making out is a lead up to? Your actions are saying yes, so he continues. Your freezing up doesn't tell him anything.


Making out is just that, making out. It is not a lead up to anything and it is sick that you think making out will always lead to sex. A man has no entitlement to sex and should never assume that sex would happen just because they were making out.


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous07 said:


> A guy should never have to coax, persuade, push, nudge a woman into having sex. If she isn't giving it freely, then move on!


What do you say to the women who want this sort of dynamic?


----------



## that.girl

Anonymous07 said:


> I think guys need to learn that in order for sex to happen the woman needs to be enthusiastic about it or else it should not happen. If she says no, then stop, even if you think she is being "playful". If she is just laying there, stop and back away.


This. This. 100x, THIS. 

But I'm still stuck on the fact that so many parents admit to not explaining this to their children.
If you don't, your son might be the boy pulling off a teenagers pants, with nothing but good intentions, while she's frozen in fear. Even worse, your daughter might be that girl, who doesn't know the words to use to make him stop without making him hate her.
Don't expect your teenagers to understand the adult shades of sexuality. They need your help and experience.


----------



## Anonymous07

Cletus said:


> What do you say to the women who want this sort of dynamic?


Personally I hate all of the stupid game playing, but understand that some guys and girls do those sorts of things. It is safer for all involved if the guy stops no matter what when the woman says "no" or if she is just laying there(not actively pursuing sex). Then if she really wants it, she will tell him to continue and they are forced to communicate. If she doesn't communicate that, then it can be easier to see that the woman is scared of what is happening and rape is avoided.


----------



## Anon Pink

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> BS. It's not my responsibility to make sure she upholds her boundaries. If she didn't want to have sex, she didn't have to help me undress her.


Yes and no. 

Correct, it's not your responsibility to uphold her murky boundaries. But it is your responsibility to have clear consent.

Incorrect to think that sex is something you GET, instead of something you share. SHARE....that is the word that seems to be missing with your view on sex.





> That you mixed your signals is not his fault. What did you think making out is a lead up to? Your actions are saying yes, so he continues. Your freezing up doesn't tell him anything.



Making out was nice, enjoyable, good. I didn't think consenting to making out was also consenting to penetration. Still don't think the two are connected. Not sure how you think they are connected?




> You've obviously felt the experience was traumatic and I'm sorry about that. None of the virgins I've been with thought so.
> 
> I'd suggest your post indicates that you should have been taught more about sex. The teaching of girls, not boys. Besides the age difference, I don't see anything he should have done differently. It's not his responsibility to enforce your boundaries. At any point, you could have said no. You didn't because of your fear of judgment. That's not a flaw in his character. He can't read your mind. All he knows is he has an active participant making out with him who isn't stopping his advances. He knew what he wanted and thought he had a willing partner.


Oh yes, very clearly my experience indicates the need to teach our daughters about sex and the language of boundaries and insisting on the respect of those boundaries. You are correct again, my fear of judgement and rejection kept me silent on something when inside I was screaming NO NO get OFF!


This is exactly why I started this thread!

How do you teach your sons, yes SONS, about the need for consent? Does a girl who is silent mean consent? Does a girl who likes kissing but timidly pushes your hand away mean she need coaxing? What exactly do you teach your sons about gaining consent? Do you even think about it?




> I'm glad the violent rape issue is out of the way though, because this is what I thought this thread was supposed to be about, and how I was engaging it.
> 
> If not for statutory rape, there is no way I can consider the guy in this example a rapist.



This thread was never about violent rape. That's a freaking no brainer! This thread is about the difference between pushing, coaxing, schmoozing, and rape. And you Dvls, really need to pay attention!


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

norajane said:


> When I was a virgin, I talked with my boyfriend about having sex, shared my thoughts and concerns, he shared his, prepared with birth control, and we planned our first night together.
> 
> NO PUSHING OR PRODDING OR NUDGING OR ESCALATING WAS INVOLVED OR NECESSARY, NOR DID I WANT TO BE PUSHED OR PRODDED OR NUDGED OR ESCALATED.
> 
> This is exactly the wrong message to teach boys - that they have to push their girlfriends into having sex when they aren't ready for it. This is how they get into trouble when they push and don't even know what they did wrong because they were just following what Unlce Dvl told them to do with reluctant virgins or they won't get laid until they are 17.
> 
> Yeah, I'm not going to feel sorry for any teenager who has to wait until their partner is actually ready to have sex with them. No one is OWED sex when they want it just because they want it now.
> 
> And why call this young woman a sex hound? Why not call her an awesome young woman who was enthusiastic about having sex with you? Why do you have to put her down?


I claim no entitlement to sex and I'm certainly not seeking sympathy. I am however within my right to seek it, and one method works, while the other really doesn't. Don't like it? Don't do it. If she doesn't like it, she can say no, break up with me and ta da!!! She doesn't have to deal with me being "pushy" and I don't have to deal with a prude. Amazing how free will works. I see nothing wrong with pursuing my desires.

I'm glad you had very nice conversations about sex as a virgin. I've been that route too. You know what happened? Nothing. Later discovered she gave it up to a more aggressive guy. So much for that theory. Whether you or I like it or not, it is the guy who takes action who is most often rewarded. That's not the fault of MEN. Turns out even, for some people, if you talk about something too much it wigs them out and now it's become too much of a "planned" thing rather than the "feeling" for it they wanted to have. Planning sex is wise, but it isn't sexy even for a married couple forget about a virgin. Virgins often have quasi-romantic notions of how this is going to play out. Certainly none of those I've been with wanted to plan it like "Ok, we're going to do it this weekend. We need these supplies." Instead I heard, "I don't know... I guess when I know I'll feel it, but I enjoy making out and hope that's enough for now." So you make out... yesterday she wouldn't let you touch a boob... today she does... and one by one, all the boundaries fall away and sex is eventually had.

This isn't rape. Teach girls to be more sexually assertive, whether to have or not have sex. There's nothing wrong with boys pursuing their wants. When the two collide in opposition, it makes no more sense to criticize the boy's pursuit of his interest in having sex than it is to criticize the girl for pursuing her interest in not having it. He's free to make his advances. She's free to shoot them down. They're both free to move on at will.

As for the "sex hound", I'm only reusing Conrad's description. I don't even consider it a put down (a hound is a hunting dog, so the woman is a sex seeker). She was a very sexually aggressive woman. I don't have anything bad to say about her. Wasn't the greatest experience but I'm happy she pulled the trigger, because at the time, I was too much of a puss to make such moves - having associated such behavior with "bad men" (thanks mom!). As a result, I had already missed out on a couple girls who were interested in sex with me, but moved on for my lack of nut sack. Lesson learned.


----------



## Healer

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> What did you think making out is a lead up to? Your actions are saying yes, so he continues. Your freezing up doesn't tell him anything.


Wow.


----------



## Cletus

Anon Pink said:


> To be honest, if I ever saw that guy again, I would really like the opportunity to go over that night, to tell him what I couldn't then, and to let him know how badly that experience affected me. As a parent now, I can understand that he maybe didn't know what my silence meant. I can also accept that he didn't know what my lack of movement meant. I don't believe he intended to force himself on me, nor do I believe he had any idea that was in fact, exactly what he was doing!


Then I'm going to ask a difficult question - 

Why do you use the word "rape" to describe this night? There was apparently no malice, no crossing of obvious boundaries, no taking of something that had been described explicitly as off limits.

It is a tragedy, and I am sorry for you, but a tragedy of communication and incorrect assumptions surrounding a sexual act. I wish we had a different word for this sort of thing. For all your partner knew, he was behaving exactly like he thought he was supposed to, and would have immediately stopped if you'd only said "no". 

I'm not blaming the victim, just the circumstances. I'm not comfortable labeling your boyfriend a rapist in this situation when he never had the opportunity to show his character, especially in the day long before the concept of active consent became widely known.

In light of your thread, he should have been better educated. But never ascribe to malice that which can be explained through ignorance, and I think rape should be reserved for those circumstances where malice or wanton disregard come into play.


----------



## Anon Pink

Healer said:


> Wow.


No SH!t.


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> Then I'm going to ask a difficult question -
> 
> Why do you use the word "rape" to describe this night? There was apparently no malice, no crossing of obvious boundaries, no taking of something that had been described explicitly as off limits.
> 
> It is a tragedy, and I am sorry for you, but a tragedy of communication and incorrect assumptions surrounding a sexual act. I wish we had a different word for this sort of thing. For all your partner knew, he was behaving exactly like he thought he was supposed to, and would have immediately stopped if you'd only said "no".
> 
> I'm not blaming the victim, just the circumstances. I'm not comfortable labeling your boyfriend a rapist in this situation when he never had the opportunity to show his character, especially in the day long before the concept of active consent became widely known.


That's exactly what added to the shame and trauma, he wasn't a bad guy and he probably would have stopped if I had had my wits about me enough to say NO!

However, let's look at this another way.

You and I are talking on the street. I lean in and laugh at something you say. I touch your shoulder a few times and you continue talking with me. Then I lean back, take my right hand and pull it back, make a fist and while I look you in the eye I punch you in the face. You saw me do all of that and failed to defend yourself. You watched me make a fist and pull my arm into a swing and you never said, stop. Did you consent to being punched in the face?


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> Ugh...I can't continue reading and hear about pushing and escalating, it is sickening.
> 
> Thank you for what you are trying to do here Anon. Sadly, I think you just stepped in a huge pile of crap.


It is making it quite clear what education boys need to get. Don't do that. It is step 1 on the road to covert contract. It is not attractive. Just pukezilla.


----------



## Cletus

Anon Pink said:


> Did you consent to being punched in the face?


No, but only because I didn't even have the opportunity to stop you. Only if I had the time and means to react, block, duck, or hit first but did not use that opportunity do I (implicitly) consent to being punched in the face.


----------



## Anonymous07

Cletus said:


> Then I'm going to ask a difficult question -
> 
> Why do you use the word "rape" to describe this night? There was apparently no malice, no crossing of obvious boundaries, no taking of something that had been described explicitly as off limits.
> 
> It is a tragedy, and I am sorry for you, but a tragedy of communication and incorrect assumptions surrounding a sexual act. I wish we had a different word for this sort of thing. For all your partner knew, he was behaving exactly like he thought he was supposed to, and would have immediately stopped if you'd only said "no".
> 
> I'm not blaming the victim, just the circumstances. I'm not comfortable labeling your boyfriend a rapist in this situation when he never had the opportunity to show his character, especially in the day long before the concept of active consent became widely known.
> 
> In light of your thread, he should have been better educated. But never ascribe to malice that which can be explained through ignorance, and I think rape should be reserved for those circumstances where malice or wanton disregard come into play.


Sex is off limits unless there is clear consent. What happened is still clearly rape, even if there was no malice involved. I don't remember if it was earlier in this thread or another one, but the topic of the guy who raped his wife came up. He entered her while she was asleep. Was there malice involved? No, but it's still rape. She didn't want to have sex and it was forced upon her. That is rape.


----------



## EleGirl

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening all
> IMHO, a woman who gives unclear / inconsistent signals deserves to be alone.
> 
> I would absolutely not tolerate a woman who expected me to figure out which "no" was for real, and which wasn't - with a felony rape charge waiting for me if I guess wrong. I'll find someone who makes her interest completely clear.
> 
> Needless to say, BDSM play by pre-arranged discussion is completely fine. If someone wants to be ravished, that's great, just be sure everyone is on the same page.


Exactly. If she cannot enthusiastically say that she is into having sex.. he needs to walk away.

Thank you Richard, you hit the nail on the head. This is one of the things that boys need to be taught.

If men took this attitude, a woman who actually wanted the sex would learn that they have to give the guy a very clear yes.


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> No, but only because I didn't even have the opportunity to stop you. Only if I had the time and means to react, block, duck, or hit first but did not use that opportunity do I (implicitly) consent to being punched in the face.


You did have the means though, didn't you? You're not stupid, not drunk or on drugs. You saw me take my arm back, make a fist. It was a sucker punch. I wasn't fast. I was methodical. You're taller than me, bigger than me and probably smarter than me. You simply had zero experience with a woman who connects talking, laughing and shoulder touching with a punch in the face.


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous07 said:


> Sex is off limits unless there is clear consent. What happened is still clearly rape, even if there was no malice involved. I don't remember if it was earlier in this thread or another one, but the topic of the guy who raped his wife came up. He entered her while she was asleep. Was there malice involved? No, but it's still rape. She didn't want to have sex and it was forced upon her. That is rape.


Clearly I'm not talking about a situation where you don't even have the opportunity to give consent.

I will always have difficulty putting all of the blame on one party when the victim could have completely stopped the encounter with the simple word "no". An ignorant or unsophisticated but otherwise decent person becomes a sexual predator.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> What do you say to the women who want this sort of dynamic?


I say that she need to be very clear. She needs to state some like..."If you want it, you need to take it."

I've done that...


----------



## Cletus

Anon Pink said:


> You did have the means though, didn't you? You're not stupid, not drunk or on drugs. You saw me take my arm back, make a fist. It was a sucker punch. I wasn't fast. I was methodical. You're taller than me, bigger than me and probably smarter than me. You simply had zero experience with a woman who connects talking, laughing and shoulder touching with a punch in the face.


If as you say I was fully aware of my situation, saw the fist come back in what was clearly a punch, and had ample time to at least duck but didn't, then yes, I allowed it to happen.

In this case, I would almost _certainly_ have had to concede to the face punch to overcome the autonomic reflex to get out of the way.


----------



## ConanHub

Shoto1984 said:


> As I said, completely inappropriate. What you assumed my meaning to be and what it was were completely different. You assigned sarcasm where there was none. The point was fairness and if we're going to do this right then everyone who has these things happen without consent is a victim....even me which I hadn't considered previously.
> 
> So you made it personal and made it personal.


Shoto. You are misreading Eli. You are talking about fairness but there is really no equivalent to your example of having your butt grabbed and a woman experiencing the same.

One factor that eliminates fairness is the size, strength, aggression and toughness differences between men and women.

I have never been threatened by a woman aggressively pursuing me or even offended. There are also extremely few men in existence that could take me out in a direct confrontation and, I believe, no women.

I have also never seen an aggressive female that was hideous. The confident woman is usually somewhat attractive.

Undesirable men are aggressive regardless of how attractive women perceive them.

When I was 21 and my youthful "prettiness" was still in bloom. I did an experiment on Halloween.

I was working as a server/waiter in a casino. I went to one of my woman friends and transformed myself.

With her help, I transformed myself into a woman. It took hours and it was extremely uncomfortable, shaving legs was the worst followed by evil shoes with heels.

Aside from being 5'10" and weighing 170, I looked attractive.

There were always tall, exotic women hanging out in the casino so I was not too unusual. I was wearing a short black skirt and a blue uniform top. I had on a stuffed wire bra, third worst thing, ouch!

I truly found out that night what it is like to be a woman in public.

I have never felt, before or since, as vulnerable and "naked" as I did that night. Everyone, male and female, treated me and reacted to me far differently than as a man.

My body became public property to any man close enough to touch me. Even the non sexual touches were astounding in that all men thought they could touch me without permission. I had totally eliminated any personal boundary by simply changing my gender.

The sexual touches were outrageous! My ass got more unwanted, unwarranted and uninvited attention than I thought possible. The number of times that I was groped in one night easily rivals the number of times from women for my life up to that point!

Women, obviously, did not smile at me once or give me any respect or regard as well.

I did get better tips.

Towards the end of my shift, I had definitely had enough and when the final ass grab came, I spun and grabbed the offender who was about 6'2" and 210 lbs.

I lifted him out of his chair and off his feet none too gently. I set him down rough and he landed on his ass on the floor.

The absolute shock on his face and the rowdy laughter from his table made the moment.:smthumbup:

The world women live in has a different shade and temperature than that of men. You can't see it until you live it, feel the vulnerability and the vast majority of women can't pull the testosterone fueled strength I possessed to bare on their offenders.

Men and women are equal but far from the same. I do blame some "radical" feminists and some male chauvinists for contributing to the lack of education in modern times. I do not believe the good old days were always that good but I always approve of societies that recognize and structure themselves considering the very real differences in genders.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> I say that she need to be very clear. She needs to state some like..."If you want it, you need to take it."
> 
> I've done that...


Ok, that's interesting. 

What then was the agreed upon signal for "now I really want you to stop. No, really"?


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> Ok, that's interesting.
> 
> What then was the agreed upon signal for "now I really want you to stop. No, really"?


An excellent question...to ask of your partner.


----------



## EleGirl

Anon Pink said:


> That's exactly what added to the shame and trauma, he wasn't a bad guy and he probably would have stopped if I had had my wits about me enough to say NO!
> 
> However, let's look at this another way.
> 
> You and I are talking on the street. I lean in and laugh at something you say. I touch your shoulder a few times and you continue talking with me. Then I lean back, take my right hand and pull it back, make a fist and while I look you in the eye I punch you in the face. You saw me do all of that and failed to defend yourself. You watched me make a fist and pull my arm into a swing and you never said, stop. Did you consent to being punched in the face?


Did you ever talk to him about this after that incident?


----------



## SadSamIAm

Anon Pink said:


> It has EVERYTHING to do with this discussion!
> 
> Why do you take offense to those question?


Because he was already found not guilty of rape. The questions sound like he is getting put on trial again.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> Ok, that's interesting.
> 
> What then was the agreed upon signal for "now I really want you to stop. No, really"?


It is not uncommon when power is part of the play to do exactly that, agree to a safe word that has nothing to do with it.


----------



## that.girl

The whole idea that she should be responsible for stopping him is a little weird to me.

Let's say you're on a first date with a girl. You're at dinner. You get a burger, she gets a salad. But you want some salad. Would you just take it from her plate without asking? Probably not. You would ask, or if you're lucky, she would offer. Most guys wouldn't just take her food and assume she would stop them if it was a problem. 

Why is it rude to take her salad without her saying it's okay, but not rude to have sex with her without her saying it's okay?


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Shoto1984 said:


> Just to throw more fuel on the fire... I dated a woman who engaged in foreplay with me but when the it came to the "moment of truth" she would say "no" and struggle. I would stop and resume foreplay. Repeat this a few times and it was really confusing me. yes yes yes then no no no. Finally I figured I was moving ahead unless she gave me more of a fight then she had ie she could have been shredding me with her nails or biting me etc. Long story short...I did...she didn't. Afterward I mentioned to her that it was a dangerous game to play and she responded "you we're going to get it till you took it". Not easy being the male sometimes.


Then there are girls like me.. I had a strong NO to intercourse ...he knew this going in with me.. it was something I promised myself from a young age..that only my husband would get this part of me... I felt very strongly... but enjoying each other, hands roaming, mutual masturbation.. all for it... YES ! YES ! YES! 

. Dvsladv8 would call my H a wuss cause he damn well waited till we married to take me all the way.. but my H never complained...he was on board and respected me more for how I felt ...I'm not just saying this either, he has told me this. 

Our boys know we feel it's best to treat a girl with respect, for an emotional attachment to grow *before* engaging in any sexual activity, take time to get to know a girl.. ...it should be far more than just a "consent" thing ..so we feel...

Just because one consents to something does not make it good for our lives or where we are going.. if there will be regret in the morning or down the road.. was it worth it? It's something else we talk to our kids about.. 

I don't want our sons to marry a prude or they will curse the day they were born...read far too many stories here.. but I do feel they should wait for Love, exclusivity, a future in mind.. ALL IN...at the very least till age 18 for going all the way...

Our 2nd son has been with the same GF for 3 yrs (they are just 17) many would feel I am totally naive & foolish to think they are not having intercourse... and unless he is lying to us... they have not went all the way... We do talk about such things in our house. 

He told me last year her mother told her to wait till age 17...I found it pretty funny as she was more lenient than us!....She comes from a catholic family who goes to Mass and all.. we don't even go to church anymore. I know our son is like us.. cares about the emotional attachment ... can't see our sons ever pushing a girl... it's not what they are made of.. they want to do the right thing and marry the woman they love...

And of course I care a great deal they choose a woman wholly into them..and not thinking lowly of them because they haven't slept around..as this is what most men DO...


----------



## ConanHub

I am finding the attitude of missing out on virgins because of a lack of aggression to be very concerning.

I think that whole mindset to be wrong. I have been with many. Some women were very aggressive but all of them gave very clear and enthusiastic consent.

I have actually been at a couple of parties where some guy was getting "pushy" with a girl that I could clearly tell was uncomfortable but the idiot just kept it up.

There is a mindlessness that men can let themselves get lost in but they have to keep it on a leash with newer partners.

I put a stop to the scene. The girl seemed embarrassed but relieved. The guy started to get mad at me until he looked in my face and saw what I had for him there.


----------



## SadSamIAm

EleGirl said:


> I say that she need to be very clear. She needs to state some like..."If you want it, you need to take it."
> 
> I've done that...


But doesn't saying that take away from the excitement. 

You want to be taken. You don't want to have to tell someone to take you.


----------



## Anon Pink

SadSamIAm said:


> Because he was already found not guilty of rape. The questions sound like he is getting put on trial again.


He was put on trial again. And I find him guilty. Deal with it!


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anon Pink said:


> Yes and no.
> 
> Correct, it's not your responsibility to uphold her murky boundaries. But it is your responsibility to have clear consent.
> 
> Incorrect to think that sex is something you GET, instead of something you share. SHARE....that is the word that seems to be missing with your view on sex.


Eh. This is just romanticizing. Softer words.

As far as I'm concerned, her participation in making out is clear consent. If she wishes to change that consent when the behavior changes, she should speak up. I spoke up by escalating from making out. Take responsibility for yourselves and stop demanding we do it for you.



Anon Pink said:


> Making out was nice, enjoyable, good. I didn't think consenting to making out was also consenting to penetration. Still don't think the two are connected. Not sure how you think they are connected?


Do you meet someone and just bend over for sex? Generally not I should think. Making out is also called foreplay... because it comes fore-sex... before sex. It is a scale of sexual activity - beginning with touch or flirting on one end, and intercourse on the other.

Your initial actions were affirmative. You want this sexual activity. He wants more, so he escalates to removing your clothes. You don't resist or change the affirmative to a negative, so it stands. You've implied that you are good with what is going on, as he has been given no negative indication.



Anon Pink said:


> Oh yes, very clearly my experience indicates the need to teach our daughters about sex and the language of boundaries and insisting on the respect of those boundaries. You are correct again, my fear of judgement and rejection kept me silent on something when inside I was screaming NO NO get OFF!


I'm sorry, and I wish you had been properly equipped to do so. Girls should be prepared for the sexual advances that boys will bring. You can tell boys all day long not to advance (good luck!), but in the end, whatever behavior is most rewarded with sex is what boys will do.



Anon Pink said:


> I don't believe he intended to force himself on me, nor do I believe he had any idea that was in fact, exactly what he was doing!
> 
> This is exactly why I started this thread!
> 
> How do you teach your sons, yes SONS, about the need for consent? Does a girl who is silent mean consent? Does a girl who likes kissing but timidly pushes your hand away mean she need coaxing? What exactly do you teach your sons about gaining consent? Do you even think about it?


Simply put, you don't. Consent takes all sorts of forms and can easily be misinterpreted. Particularly, the vulnerable, sexually repressed and shamed conservative virgin isn't likely going to jump out and say "YES! Have sex with me." IMO, you're just prolonging her virginity (often against her own inner desires), which was the intent of all that dogmatic shame in the first place... the good girl waits till marriage bs.

There's nothing wrong with coaxing and persuasion. If you can't handle persuasion to give your body, God help you with the rest of life. Teach GIRLS, and encourage GIRLS to handle social pressure and persuasion. Ensure they have the knowledge and confidence to stand up for themselves.

The boys aren't doing anything wrong in escalating a make out session to sex.

You know how some women lament that their husband's never initiate? Beyond laziness, this is also a nice guy trait acquired from years of negativity toward his sexual motivations and feeling justified to seek what he wants. You'll find that straight out of NMMNG. I think if you start teaching boys that they may not escalate, it's not unlike shaming them for their desires. In a practical sense, do you imagine it as a conversation? "Can I touch your boob?" "yes." (yay). "Can I undo your pants?" Escalation isn't just to intercourse, its a whole slide along a scale. Do we need an explicit yes before every step?

I think you avoid teaching boys that their sexuality and desire to advance is somehow automatically wrong, and you avoid this weird conversation where she gives explicit approval to everything before he tries (holy crap... what woman finds that attractive??)... all by simply properly equipping girls to maintain their own boundaries. When he reaches them, she has the confidence to say "you shall not pass!" and stick to it.

Is it not part of a man's attractive charisma or mystique that he asserts himself? That he persuades and influences others? That he is confident and in control? That he takes chances and pushes limits? That he is ambitious? That he creates comfort?

Take away persuasion and escalation, requiring her explicit approval of everything men may do... and soon enough I think you'll find yourself not attracted to any of the men.



Anon Pink said:


> This thread was never about violent rape. That's a freaking no brainer! This thread is about the difference between pushing, coaxing, schmoozing, and rape. And you Dvls, really need to pay attention!


That's what I thought it was, but then I got countered with unambiguous rape examples (knife point etc), which wound up with me cornered by my own brash statements and hostility to the more ambiguous context. They weren't really meant for both.

Persuading your way around "no" isn't rape. Rape is taking it when he fails to persuade her to stop saying "no". Persuasion is always a part of the game, because a woman's default state is for the most part "no". So we persuade you to let us take you out. We're persuading you to like us by making you laugh. We're persuading you trust us by showing vulnerability. On and on.

Persuasion is a good thing. If we're not persuading you, imo, we're not interested in you.


----------



## always_alone

Anonymous07 said:


> Sex is off limits unless there is clear consent. What happened is still clearly rape, even if there was no malice involved. I don't remember if it was earlier in this thread or another one, but the topic of the guy who raped his wife came up. He entered her while she was asleep. Was there malice involved? No, but it's still rape. She didn't want to have sex and it was forced upon her. That is rape.


Agreed! Malice is not required for it to be rape. Indifference to lack of consent and pushing ahead anyway is enough.

I have read some accounts from guys who were "too ignorant" to realize how traumatic "that" sexual experience was for their partner. But instead of justifying it as "meaning well" or accusing her of "murky boundaries", they actually owned it and altered their behaviour in the future. 

Lesson learned.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> Ok, that's interesting.
> 
> What then was the agreed upon signal for "now I really want you to stop. No, really"?


If she says stop, no, pushes the guy away, etc. Those are signals for the guy to stop.

Any thing that is a mixed signal needs to be taken as a no. Not as, keep working to seduce me. The guy needs to just stop, right there. 

Now if she just wants to play the hard to get game.... she needs to SAY IT OUT LOUD.

"Aw, come one, if you want it you need to take it."

I've played this game. it's fun. I've always been very verbal about it, teasing the guy, laughing, etc. It's very clear. I have never played it and just said 'no', etc.'


----------



## SadSamIAm

Anon Pink said:


> He was put on trial again. And I find him guilty. Deal with it!


I am surprised!

When you talk about what happened to you, you admit you think he would have stopped if you would have told him to. You said he was a good guy. That he probably didn't mean any harm.

If you said these things during a trial, I have a hard time believing he would have been charged with rape.


----------



## EleGirl

Anon Pink said:


> EleGirl, I saw him one at the grocery store a few months later. He called to ask me out again. I wasn't home and never called him back. I saw him one other time when I was in college and waitressing. He came in. Alone, sat in my station and I brought him his food and drink. We chatted. I pretended to be busy and avoided him as best I could.


Was that night the only time you went out with him? Or was he your boyfriend until that night?

I'm thinking that the fact that he did not call you up to ask you out after that night is very telling. It makes it look like he knew that what he did was wrong. I would think that a guy who got sex from a willing partner would be more likely to call her up to ask her out for more.


----------



## Anon Pink

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Persuading your way around "no" isn't rape. Rape is taking it when he fails to persuade her to stop saying "no". Persuasion is always a part of the game, because a woman's default state is for the most part "no". So we persuade you to let us take you out. We're persuading you to like us by making you laugh. We're persuading you trust us by showing vulnerability. On and on.
> 
> Persuasion is a good thing. If we're not persuading you, imo, we're not interested in you.


Wrong. Failure to say yes is failure to consent.

As a married woman, now in her 50's, highly sexual and on the kinky side, persuasion is delightful! A little bit of rough and tumble is exciting! Fake forceful taking is a fun and wanted experience. BECAUSE I have given consent in clear language that my Nice Guy husband understands, not because I fail to so no, but because I have said yes please do!

Haven't been single in 33 years so sex with a new partner is a distant memory. However, if the woman you're seeing can't give consent, that is a woman you need to back away from. If your woman can't say yes please, she has some issue with owning her sexuality and she isn't likely to make a good partner, for sex or for relationship.


----------



## EleGirl

SadSamIAm said:


> But doesn't saying that take away from the excitement.
> 
> You want to be taken. You don't want to have to tell someone to take you.


For me it does not take away the excitement. Never has.

What a couple can do is to communicate (there's that word again).

Before they have sex they talk about things. If they are going to play games like "take me" they come up with a safe word that has nothing to do with what's going on. Like "orange".

So if she or he wants things to stop, that person says "orange". That's it. It stops.


----------



## Anonymous07

Anon Pink said:


> minimally experienced and otherwise decent young man and turn him into a sexual predator over what happened that night.


:scratchhead: "decent" young man who raped you? 

I wouldn't call my ex a "decent" young man. Yes, he had a couple good qualities, which is why we were together to begin with, but no decent man would rape or try to rape a woman. There are no excuses for that type of action.


----------



## NobodySpecial

ConanHub said:


> I am finding the attitude of missing out on virgins because of a lack of aggression to be very concerning.
> 
> I think that whole mindset to be wrong. I have been with many. Some women were very aggressive but all of them gave very clear and enthusiastic consent.
> 
> I have actually been at a couple of parties where some guy was getting "pushy" with a girl that I could clearly tell was uncomfortable but the idiot just kept it up.
> 
> There is a mindlessness that men can let themselves get lost in but they have to keep it on a leash with newer partners.
> 
> I put a stop to the scene. The girl seemed embarrassed but relieved. The guy started to get mad at me until he looked in my face and saw what I had for him there.


This guy is my cup of tea.


----------



## Buddy400

Anon Pink said:


> And I agree that it isn't entirely fair to take an unsophisticated, but minimally experienced and otherwise decent young man and turn him into a sexual predator over what happened that night.


And yet you claim this experience as an example of "rape". What if you had reported it to the police and he'd been jailed and marked as a sex offender for the rest of his life?

Can't we somehow separate instances like this from violent, forcible rape?


----------



## EleGirl

Anon Pink said:


> That night was our 3rd or 4th date. He went back to school a week later. He was home on break when I saw him in the grocery store.
> 
> I frankly didn't know what to think the next day. I expected him to call but he didn't. I have a memory of him coming to my house to pick me up and I'm pretty sure it happened after that night. But I can't remember anything other than him being at the door. Nothing... I know it was after that night but can't remember when after that night. I have gaps in memory from high school years. I was a mess.


You'd think that when the woman/girl freezes would be a HUGE flag to the guy that something is terribly wrong.


----------



## Anon Pink

Anonymous07 said:


> :scratchhead: "decent" young man who raped you?
> 
> I wouldn't call my ex a "decent" young man. Yes, he had a couple good qualities, which is why we were together to begin with, but no decent man would rape or try to rape a woman. There are no excuses for that type of action.





SadSamIAm said:


> I am surprised!
> 
> When you talk about what happened to you, you admit you think he would have stopped if you would have told him to. You said he was a good guy. That he probably didn't mean any harm.
> 
> If you said these things during a trial, I have a hard time believing he would have been charged with rape.


First, thank you for taking it easy on me about this. It is difficult to talk about.

I honestly don't know what to call it except for rape because that it what it felt like. That's what it felt like then, and after ward.

Once I embarked on healing my sexual soul I had to confront that night over and over again and I simply don't know what to call it because I do believe he was, and probably is, a decent guy with no malice.

I believe my experience is not uncommon. When questionnaires come out they rely on self reporting. Self reporting means you reply on your own words and definitions of what you have experienced. Not the legal definition, nor the medical definition. 

In your own words, based on how you experience events, have you ever been sexually assaulted? Yes. 

Were you forced, or coerced into having unwanted sexual contact? Yes. 

Did you suffer any injuries as a result of unwanted sexual contact? Yes.

Did you report this unwanted sexual contact to the police or a trusted adult. HELL NO!!!


----------



## Anon Pink

Buddy400 said:


> And yet you claim this experience as an example of "rape". What if you had reported it to the police and he'd been jailed and marked as a sex offender for the rest of his life?
> 
> Can't we somehow separate instances like this from violent, forcible rape?


Buddy, that too is something I feel great shame about. He didn't deserve that. 

However, based on my experience with reporting molestation as a child, there was NO FVCKING way I would have gone to the police! Not enough money in the world to convince me to go to the police! Horrible horrible experience! This was the 1970's and things were quite different then.


----------



## EleGirl

Anon Pink said:


> Buddy, that too is something I feel great shame about. *He didn't deserve that.*


There is a confusion that women experience in this type of situation. It's hard to see a guy who you date as someone who had mal intent. You blame yourself for your mind freezing.. when a persons' mind and body does this, they have no control over it. It's a very confusing situation. 



Anon Pink said:


> However, based on my experience with reporting molestation as a child, there was NO FVCKING way I would have gone to the police! Not enough money in the world to convince me to go to the police! Horrible horrible experience! This was the 1970's and things were quite different then.


I agree with this. In the 1970's nothing at all would have been done. Today? it's a toss up. You were on a date. You have no injuries.


----------



## ConanHub

EleGirl said:


> You'd think that when the woman/girl freezes would be a HUGE flag to the guy that something is terribly wrong.


I have had a couple of girls be very enthusiastic about making out but seem uncomfortable or have their enthusiasm drop off when I started touching them below the belt or started to remove clothing. I stopped immediately.

Seemed pretty clear to me that those girls wanted to explore sexuality with their clothes still on. They even wanted to intertwine and grind enthusiastically but no further. I may have been a little disappointed but it was still a lot of fun and I could not even conceive proceeding if they were not hot and into it.

I am about the furthest thing from a wuss imaginable. I have never lost a fight had many sexual partners before marriage and really was the guy that took the hot girl home, more instances of her taking me home actually and I have never been "pushy" to the point of sex with anyone of them.

I have only been aggressive with my wife after some time into our relationship and after much communication and consent.

I don't think any man should employ aggression or a pushy attitude with new or even newer partners. That seriously belongs in the realm of a LTR.

Even if a girl seemed uncomfortable, I would stop and ask some questions. I asked if they were virgins, they all said no. I would also ask if they wanted to proceed, they all said yes and some even gave me instructions on how to get them more revved up.

This attitude really should be taught to boys growing up. 

I am no "nice" guy but I am a gentleman.


----------



## Anon Pink

ConanHub said:


> I have had a couple of girls be very enthusiastic about making out but seem uncomfortable or have their enthusiasm drop off when I started touching them below the belt or started to remove clothing. I stopped immediately.
> 
> Seemed pretty clear to me that those girls wanted to explore sexuality with their clothes still on. They even wanted to intertwine and grind enthusiastically but no further. I may have been a little disappointed but it was still a lot of fun and I could not even conceive proceeding if they were not hot and into it.
> 
> I am about the furthest thing from a wuss imaginable. I have never lost a fight had many sexual partners before marriage and really was the guy that took the hot girl home, more instances of her taking me home actually and I have never been "pushy" to the point of sex with anyone of them.
> 
> I have only been aggressive with my wife after some time into our relationship and after much communication and consent.
> 
> I don't think any man should employ aggression or a pushy attitude with new or even newer partners. That seriously belongs in the realm of a LTR.
> 
> Even if a girl seemed uncomfortable, I would stop and ask some questions. I asked if they were virgins, they all said no. I would also ask if they wanted to proceed, they all said yes and some even gave me instructions on how to get them more revved up.
> 
> This attitude really should be taught to boys growing up.
> 
> I am no "nice" guy but I am a gentleman.


Bingo!

Step right up folks we have a winner. Ladies, no pushing!


----------



## Deejo

Anon Pink said:


> Several men have been scratching their heads, saying mixed signals and wondering how they're supposed to know. And then there are guys like Dvls, who feels getting laid is the end goal when the end goal is sharing a good experience. Guys like Dvls will never get it and that's unfortunate.


If pushing boundaries, lack of consent, and the aggressor's inability to interpret inaction constitute rape;

Then I was raped the first time I had sex.

This is and will remain an absolute quagmire of a discussion.

It's a discussion you can all go and have with your children or your teens. And you know what? When they find themselves in that situation will be the determining factor for what they 'learned'.

And in my wisdom I will point out what all of you already know.

The biggest things I learned as a teen and young adult aren't when I got it right ... it was when I f*cked up royally. That is what teens and young adults do, when it comes to alcohol, drugs, sex ... insert life lesson here.

I don't like women being harmed. Period. Ever.

We talked about this enthusiastic consent thing before.

I even tried it. She laughed and said ... note, "I don't want you to have to ask, ever. I want you to take."

You know what else she used to say?

"F*ck me like you don't know me."

Apparently she could use a good talking to.

I prefer the gender stereotypes thread, and talking about how WOMEN WANT to have sex.

This flashback crap isn't doing anyone any favors. It's looking back to a time when everyone was still stuck in the shame game.


----------



## ConanHub

Despite all the heat that this thread has generated, I greatly appreciate it. I have had to step away a couple times because I was triggering. Usually when a female poster related what had happened to them.

I have found it very cathartic and I wish there was a section of TAM that dealt with this subject alone.

Sexual damage from abuse and assault is at plague levels. I only know one woman, wife of close friend, that experienced no molestation or sexual assault in her life. 

Thanks for sharing Anon and all others. I don't know that I ever will.


----------



## Anon Pink

Deejo said:


> If pushing boundaries, lack of consent, and the aggressor's inability to interpret inaction constitute rape;
> 
> Then I was raped the first time I had sex.
> 
> This is and will remain an absolute quagmire of a discussion.
> 
> It's a discussion you can all go and have with your children or your teens. And you know what? When they find themselves in that situation will be the determining factor for what they 'learned'.
> 
> And in my wisdom I will point out what all of you already know.
> 
> *The biggest things I learned as a teen and young adult aren't when I got it right ... it was when I f*cked up royally*. That is what teens and young adults do, when it comes to alcohol, drugs, sex ... insert life lesson here.


Very true!




> I don't like women being harmed. Period. Ever.
> 
> We talked about this enthusiastic consent thing before.
> 
> I even tried it. She laughed and said ... note, "I don't want you to have to ask, ever. I want you to take."
> 
> You know what else she used to say?
> 
> "F*ck me like you don't know me."
> 
> Apparently she could use a good talking to.


Very true again. A good talking to, an agreement, an understanding. Or perhaps just a safe word?





> This flashback crap isn't doing anyone any favors. It's looking back to a time when everyone was still stuck in the shame game.


I debated about disclosing my experience. In fact I had planned not to. But when I saw Dvls post I felt it was time the virgin had her say.

These ARE murky waters. This discussion is or can be productive. Wading through the uncomfortable murkiness can lead to clarity. I think we're getting there.


----------



## ConanHub

Deejo said:


> If pushing boundaries, lack of consent, and the aggressor's inability to interpret inaction constitute rape;
> 
> Then I was raped the first time I had sex.
> 
> This is and will remain an absolute quagmire of a discussion.
> 
> It's a discussion you can all go and have with your children or your teens. And you know what? When they find themselves in that situation will be the determining factor for what they 'learned'.
> 
> And in my wisdom I will point out what all of you already know.
> 
> The biggest things I learned as a teen and young adult aren't when I got it right ... it was when I f*cked up royally. That is what teens and young adults do, when it comes to alcohol, drugs, sex ... insert life lesson here.
> 
> I don't like women being harmed. Period. Ever.
> 
> We talked about this enthusiastic consent thing before.
> 
> I even tried it. She laughed and said ... note, "I don't want you to have to ask, ever. I want you to take."
> 
> You know what else she used to say?
> 
> "F*ck me like you don't know me."
> 
> Apparently she could use a good talking to.
> 
> I prefer the gender stereotypes thread, and talking about how WOMEN WANT to have sex.
> 
> This flashback crap isn't doing anyone any favors. It's looking back to a time when everyone was still stuck in the shame game.


She clearly communicated with you Deej. I like this thread a lot.


----------



## EleGirl

Anon Pink said:


> IDK, it sure was a lot of blood for a simply virgin.


The amount of blood you describe is concerning. Did you hurt for a long time afterwards? It sounds like you might have had some rips in your insides.

I know that when broken, the hymen will bleed. I had some jerk break mine with his fingers. it hurt. After he did it. He laughed and said that he, his father and his brothers had a contest going for how man virgins they 'deflower'. The measure they use is how many hymens they break. So he told me he was adding me to his sick list.

Sick F#[email protected] 

I did bleed. But not to the extent you describe. 

I was pissed... pissed that that this was his end game. I was no a human to him. I was a number is the disgusting contest his family had going.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> If she says stop, no, pushes the guy away, etc. Those are signals for the guy to stop.
> 
> Any thing that is a mixed signal needs to be taken as a no. Not as, keep working to seduce me. The guy needs to just stop, right there.
> 
> Now if she just wants to play the hard to get game.... she needs to SAY IT OUT LOUD.
> 
> "Aw, come one, if you want it you need to take it."
> 
> I've played this game. it's fun. I've always been very verbal about it, teasing the guy, laughing, etc. It's very clear. I have never played it and just said 'no', etc.'


Do you not see how this might be very difficult for someone not in your head to understand where the hard and soft boundaries lie? 

Maybe I just don't know what hard to get means in this context. Were I with you, I would err on the side of caution, and you would find me to be an unappealing lover.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

always_alone said:


> Yes, this whole attitude of "push til you get to yes, it's all part of the game" is a huge part of the problem, IMHO.
> 
> It asserts one's objectives as more important than the other person's.
> 
> We teach kids not to bully, pressure or manipulate others all the time. How is this any different?


I disagree and resent the notion that persuasion is bullying or manipulation. If you can't handle persuasion, and even advocate your own case, you're going to have a hard time at LIFE.

When two people have different opinions on a matter, having sex or not having sex in this case, it is the responsibility of each individual to make their own case.

Claiming this asserts one's objectives as more important than the others is unfounded, and rather is a demand of deference to the other's objective, thus placing THAT objective as more important.

If he wants sex, he ought to advocate his want. If she doesn't want sex, she ought to advocate that want. Thus, he escalates, and she says no. He persuades, and she may persuade right back.

You know what isn't persuading anyone that you don't want sex? Perusing/continuing hot and heavy make outs. As I said before, mixed signals.


----------



## Anon Pink

I dont remember EleGirl. It was a long time ago...in a far away land...

Yes, it is those kinds of experiences that discolor our sexual selves. What should be an exciting and enjoyable experience becomes warped. What should be a fun relationship becomes frought with mixed messages and mixed signals.

We have to teach our kids more thoroughly about not only their sexuality, but the sexuality of others. What consent is and what is isn't. Silence is NOT consent.


----------



## Shoto1984

norajane said:


> Why didn't you stop when she said no and struggled? Why didn't you stop and tell her that there would be no sex until she wanted it and didn't struggle against you?
> 
> Why didn't you stop and then look for a more enthusiastic partner who wouldn't say no and struggle _at any point_?


For the same reason she didn't stop foreplay and urged me on. As I stated to her, it was a dangerous game. It put me in a terrible position. I took the chance that I understood the communication I was getting from her correctly and it turned out I was correct but she could have been setting me up. It was a long time ago and life has taught me not to be so trusting of people's intentions anymore.


----------



## NobodySpecial

ConanHub said:


> I have had a couple of girls be very enthusiastic about making out but seem uncomfortable or have their enthusiasm drop off when I started touching them below the belt or started to remove clothing. I stopped immediately.
> 
> Seemed pretty clear to me that those girls wanted to explore sexuality with their clothes still on. They even wanted to intertwine and grind enthusiastically but no further. I may have been a little disappointed but it was still a lot of fun and I could not even conceive proceeding if they were not hot and into it.
> 
> I am about the furthest thing from a wuss imaginable. I have never lost a fight had many sexual partners before marriage and really was the guy that took the hot girl home, more instances of her taking me home actually and I have never been "pushy" to the point of sex with anyone of them.
> 
> I have only been aggressive with my wife after some time into our relationship and after much communication and consent.
> 
> I don't think any man should employ aggression or a pushy attitude with new or even newer partners. That seriously belongs in the realm of a LTR.
> 
> Even if a girl seemed uncomfortable, I would stop and ask some questions. I asked if they were virgins, they all said no. I would also ask if they wanted to proceed, they all said yes and some even gave me instructions on how to get them more revved up.
> 
> This attitude really should be taught to boys growing up.
> 
> I am no "nice" guy but I am a gentleman.


This is my husband as well. And a part of the reason that he became my husband. And almost all of the reason I was able to make the journey from vanilla to super kinky. If coeercing unwilling partners is someone's cup of tea, there is a whole world of women they will never get with.


----------



## Anonymous07

Deejo said:


> The biggest things I learned as a teen and young adult aren't when I got it right ... it was when I f*cked up royally. That is what teens and young adults do, when it comes to alcohol, drugs, sex ... insert life lesson here.


I disagree. I learned the most from watching others and taking their life lessons as my own. I watched one cousin of mine screw up over and over again(heavy drinking, teen pregnancy, throwing away her money/little self-control, etc.) and never made those same mistakes she did. I can honestly say I never "f*ckked up royally". Not all teens have to learn the hard way.


----------



## Deejo

I struggle with this.

It's a button pusher for me. Don't know why.

I've dated women who have been raped. Made me angry. Very angry. All when they were young.

I agree that conversations often have to go to very f*cking bleak places before there is a breakthrough, clarity, understanding, discernment ...

but we know it can also go other places. I'll hope for the former.

I appreciate the candor shared by some of the participants here.

And I'll be clear, I won't stand for anyone choosing to use that candor as a weapon against them.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> Do you not see how this might be very difficult for someone not in your head to understand where the hard and soft boundaries lie?
> 
> Maybe I just don't know what hard to get means in this context. Were I with you, I would err on the side of caution, and you would find me to be an unappealing lover.


Saying "If you want it you need to take it." is extremely clear communication.

If you feel that those very clear words are too hard to understand, that's your right. 

why would I find you an unappealing lover? A lover does not perform on demand. If the lover does not like the game, then just move on to something else.


----------



## Cletus

Anon Pink said:


> These ARE murky waters. This discussion is or can be productive. Wading through the uncomfortable murkiness can lead to clarity. I think we're getting there.


I appreciate the fact that you're willing to share and have a nuanced discussion about a murky topic that hurt you deeply rather than adopt a knee-jerk "castrate 'em all" solution. 

The interesting discussions always happen around the murky edges, never at the distinct and obvious points.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anonymous07 said:


> Making out is just that, making out. It is not a lead up to anything and it is sick that you think making out will always lead to sex. A man has no entitlement to sex and should never assume that sex would happen just because they were making out.


I didn't say it always leads to sex. I said it is a point along a scale. Making out IS a sexual activity. Every step along that scale is a positive indicator toward sex - don't even say it isn't. You don't make out until you're comfortable with touch. You don't kiss unless you're already comfortable with a hug. You don't have sex until you're comfortable with making out. At each step, someone took the initiative to go there... and the non-initiator goes with it, or refuses it.

There is no assumption the next step will happen, but no one is wrong for pursuing the next step along that scale. She bears the responsibility of saying no to his move to that next step if she doesn't want it. He wants the next step.

Take something as simple as a kiss. He may feel the two of them are ready for a kiss after having held hands and becoming comfortable with touch. He wants to kiss her. So what happens? He moves in to kiss her. Advancing. He doesn't ask permission.

If she's not at the same place he is, she bears the responsibility to withdraw. He is not in the wrong for attempting the next step along the progression. Given a refusal, his burden lies in persuading her that want to kiss him... to increase their connection and comfort level. Even his waiting on her is an act of persuasion. Hey, I'm safe. I'm a good guy, I'll wait and let more time persuade her. Because in reality, he wants to kiss right now. He will and should make another attempt in the future.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Anonymous07 said*: *I disagree. I learned the most from watching others and taking their life lessons as my own. I watched one cousin of mine screw up over and over again(heavy drinking, teen pregnancy, throwing away her money/little self-control, etc.) and never made those same mistakes she did. I can honestly say I never "f*ckked up royally". Not all teens have to learn the hard way.*


 I haven't agreed with you for some time lately on this forum but I sure give a hearty agree to your comment here.. I don't believe all young people are idiots who have to learn things the hard way.. I was never like this. I watched carefully, took notes, contemplated many things .. I learned how NOT to be by watching the ugly aftermath of my own Mothers choices.. 



ConanHub said:


> *I only know one woman, wife of close friend, that experienced no molestation or sexual assault in her life. *


I never experienced any either.. but I came very close with the type of men my Mother allowed in her life, into her bed...when I was just 9 yrs old living with her.. it's why I despise bad boys and will never like men who flaunt & think sex is owed to them, using women & having no thought about them the next day.. makes me cringe.. one made comments about me being a Looker someday ...so she told me yrs ago.. when she explained how my Father called her in a RAGE, taking me off of her when he heard about all the men coming to the house .. (funny she didn't want sex with him!)... 

So to this day, I feel my Father likely saved me from a very bad fate had I remained living with her. 

Seeing what her life turned into , I didn't trust men .... I believed in testing them to see what they are really after.... not just Fvcking around...that would have never satisfied me...


----------



## Anonymous07

FrenchFry said:


> Makeouts are makeouts. I'm going to teach my son that making out is not consent to sex when you are getting to know a person.


:iagree: I'll be teaching my son the same. 

Someone should have taught that to my ex, too. I was not looking for sex, just wanted to keep taking things slow until I was ready(was a virgin). He thought because we had dated for x amount of time, that he was entitled to have sex with me. It doesn't work like that.


----------



## Shoto1984

ConanHub said:


> Shoto. You are misreading Eli. You are talking about fairness but there is really no equivalent to your example of having your butt grabbed and a woman experiencing the same.
> 
> One factor that eliminates fairness is the size, strength, aggression and toughness differences between men and women.
> 
> I have never been threatened by a woman aggressively pursuing me or even offended. There are also extremely few men in existence that could take me out in a direct confrontation and, I believe, no women.
> 
> I have also never seen an aggressive female that was hideous. The confident woman is usually somewhat attractive.
> 
> Undesirable men are aggressive regardless of how attractive women perceive them.
> 
> When I was 21 and my youthful "prettiness" was still in bloom. I did an experiment on Halloween.
> 
> I was working as a server/waiter in a casino. I went to one of my woman friends and transformed myself.
> 
> With her help, I transformed myself into a woman. It took hours and it was extremely uncomfortable, shaving legs was the worst followed by evil shoes with heels.
> 
> Aside from being 5'10" and weighing 170, I looked attractive.
> 
> There were always tall, exotic women hanging out in the casino so I was not too unusual. I was wearing a short black skirt and a blue uniform top. I had on a stuffed wire bra, third worst thing, ouch!
> 
> I truly found out that night what it is like to be a woman in public.
> 
> I have never felt, before or since, as vulnerable and "naked" as I did that night. Everyone, male and female, treated me and reacted to me far differently than as a man.
> 
> My body became public property to any man close enough to touch me. Even the non sexual touches were astounding in that all men thought they could touch me without permission. I had totally eliminated any personal boundary by simply changing my gender.
> 
> The sexual touches were outrageous! My ass got more unwanted, unwarranted and uninvited attention than I thought possible. The number of times that I was groped in one night easily rivals the number of times from women for my life up to that point!
> 
> Women, obviously, did not smile at me once or give me any respect or regard as well.
> 
> I did get better tips.
> 
> Towards the end of my shift, I had definitely had enough and when the final ass grab came, I spun and grabbed the offender who was about 6'2" and 210 lbs.
> 
> I lifted him out of his chair and off his feet none too gently. I set him down rough and he landed on his ass on the floor.
> 
> The absolute shock on his face and the rowdy laughter from his table made the moment.:smthumbup:
> 
> The world women live in has a different shade and temperature than that of men. You can't see it until you live it, feel the vulnerability and the vast majority of women can't pull the testosterone fueled strength I possessed to bare on their offenders.
> 
> Men and women are equal but far from the same. I do blame some "radical" feminists and some male chauvinists for contributing to the lack of education in modern times. I do not believe the good old days were always that good but I always approve of societies that recognize and structure themselves considering the very real differences in genders.


Really? Are you sure you want to go with all of that? 

A) She seems to have applied her own agenda to my words and used that erroneous interpretation to launch an attack that referenced my family. 
B) Negating the fairness of interpretation and consequences of one's actions based on size, strength etc is indefensible. 
C) The point she (and you) seem to miss is the possible benefit of fairness in getting everyone to understand what is and isn't appropriate. 
D) The offenders appearance is of no consideration at all in this discussion. Assault from a good looking person is somehow supposed to be different from assault from a less good looking person..... ugh.
C) You may not have been threatened by a woman but I have. I've been bruised and bloodied but I took it and didn't call the cops because I did't want my kids to see their mother being taken away.

This tread seems to be bait fueled by people with an agenda not people who want to have a rational discussion.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> Saying "If you want it you need to take it." Is extremely clear communication.


Not to me. Does it mean you intend to resist, and I should overcome that resistance? Does it mean that you intend to lay there stiff as a board, forcing me to undress you and initiate every action, but hey, that's what you want? Does it mean that if you say no once, you really mean yes, if you way no twice, it's a maybe, if you say no thrice, it's a call to the police? Does it mean we wrestle Grecco-Roman style, best two out of three falls wins?

I'm not being facetious. It is NOT extremely clear to me until you have defined exactly what "it" is, what "take" means, and what constitutes retraction of that contract.



> If you feel that those very clear words are too hard to understand, that's your right.


And if you feel like belittling my cognitive inability to understand your very clear words, find another whipping boy. 



> why would I find you an unappealing lover? A lover does not perform on demand. If the lover does not like the game, then just move on to something else.


I'm assuming you want me to take it, which assumes some level of resistance on your part, else I'm not taking anything, we're giving to each other. As soon as you resist, I have been hard-wired from birth to ratchet way-the-hell down immediately. I wouldn't know how to play the game without running the risk of actually offending you, or pushing past a real boundary, or becoming too physical. I'm sure I could learn, but it would take a lot more communication than a simple "If you want it, take it".


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Healer said:


> Wow.


This is just obstinate. How did you get to the place of making out? You progressed along a sexual scale from comfort with touch, to kissing, to making out. If he has any balls at all, he probably took the chance on escalating to each of those activities... just like he took the chance to ask you out in the first place.

The next step from making out is sex. If you criticize his advancing to that step, you have to criticize his taking the step to have kissed you the first time; or held your hand the first time; or advanced to make out the first time. It's all along a progression, and he is not wrong for advancing.


----------



## that.girl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Take something as simple as a kiss. He may feel the two of them are ready for a kiss after having held hands and becoming comfortable with touch. He wants to kiss her. So what happens? He moves in to kiss her. Advancing. He doesn't ask permission.
> 
> If she's not at the same place he is, she bears the responsibility to withdraw. He is not in the wrong for attempting the next step along the progression. Given a refusal, his burden lies in persuading her that want to kiss him... to increase their connection and comfort level. Even his waiting on her is an act of persuasion. Hey, I'm safe. I'm a good guy, I'll wait and let more time persuade her. Because in reality, he wants to kiss right now. He will and should make another attempt in the future.


He's not wrong in making a move. The question is how he should react if she doesn't withdraw, but simply freezes and goes stiff. Should he continue kissing her, or slow down and see how she's feeling? 

By all means, make a move. But be very observant of her reaction.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I disagree and resent the notion that persuasion is bullying or manipulation. If you can't handle persuasion, and even advocate your own case, you're going to have a hard time at LIFE.
> 
> When two people have different opinions on a matter, having sex or not having sex in this case, it is the responsibility of each individual to make their own case.
> 
> Claiming this asserts one's objectives as more important than the others is unfounded, and rather is a demand of deference to the other's objective, thus placing THAT objective as more important.
> 
> If he wants sex, he ought to advocate his want. If she doesn't want sex, she ought to advocate that want. Thus, he escalates, and she says no. He persuades, and she may persuade right back.
> 
> You know what isn't persuading anyone that you don't want sex? Perusing/continuing hot and heavy make outs. As I said before, mixed signals.


I find wanting sex with someone who does not enthusiastically want it with you is just beyond yucky.


----------



## Healer

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> As far as I'm concerned, her participation in making out is clear consent.


That's one of the rapiest statements I've ever read.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Healer said:


> That's one of the rapiest statements I've ever read.


Yup. Thankfully the law does not agree with him!


----------



## Anonymous07

that.girl said:


> He's not wrong in making a move. The question is how he should react if she doesn't withdraw, but simply freezes and goes stiff. Should he continue kissing her, or slow down and see how she's feeling?
> 
> By all means, make a move. But be very observant of her reaction.


This and/or you can also ask. My husband(bf at the time) asked if he could kiss me. I thought it was really sweet and considerate of him. Is he a "wuss" or some guy "without balls"? No. He is a gentleman.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening shoto
If I dated a woman who struggled and said no - but didn't mean it, that would be our last date ever. Sorry, no one is attractive enough for me to put up with that sort of behavior. 

By the same token I hope that if a woman's date doesn't stop immediately when she says 'no", that would be his last date ever. (and possibly a police report depending on how things went).



Shoto1984 said:


> Just to throw more fuel on the fire... I dated a woman who engaged in foreplay with me but when the it came to the "moment of truth" she would say "no" and struggle. I would stop and resume foreplay. Repeat this a few times and it was really confusing me. yes yes yes then no no no. Finally I figured I was moving ahead unless she gave me more of a fight then she had ie she could have been shredding me with her nails or biting me etc. Long story short...I did...she didn't. Afterward I mentioned to her that it was a dangerous game to play and she responded "you we're going to get it till you took it". Not easy being the male sometimes.


----------



## Cletus

FrenchFry said:


> I'm not being facetious.
> 
> What I have a hard time understanding is if you are at all unclear of what level of consent you have you don't stop, asses the situation and ask questions. Ask questions until she hates you. Ask questions until what she (or he, really) wants is crystal clear. If she can't handle that, what kind of sexual partner are you really jumping in with?
> 
> No assumptions. Rapists LOVE assumptions. Assumptions are what gives rapists plausibility. I'll be clear that I'm not calling anyone in this thread a rapist. Actual factual rapists love using plausiblity of assumption to say "she wanted it, look what she was doing/saying wearing."
> 
> Remove assumption and to me this becomes way less murky.


I don't disagree with any of this, in fact I'm agreeing with you.

But doesn't this undercut the "Take it" vibe? Or is that just an advanced technique for people already intimately familiar with each others boundaries? I could certainly play this game with my wife, since I already know what I can and cannot do, where her physical limits are... all the relevant details that imply "I want you in control within our already established boundaries". 

But it doesn't feel very "takey".

Hey, I'm just trying to understand here. I've never been a woman, and no woman has ever in my life tried to take something sexual from me that I wasn't already enthusiastic about giving. I have never had to deal with the conditions of "I want to take it this far but no farther".


----------



## richardsharpe

"good bye"



Cletus said:


> What do you say to the women who want this sort of dynamic?


----------



## SadSamIAm

FrenchFry said:


> Makeouts are makeouts. I'm going to teach my son that making out is not consent to sex when you are getting to know a person.


What are you going to tell him when you are just getting to know someone and they want to have sex? 

That is where I find it hard to give advice. I know what I was like when I was 17 years old. To me, it was obvious when to stop and when to go. 

And when she was wanting to go, I was never able to say no. Now, looking back, I can't say I regret any of it.


----------



## ConanHub

SimplyAmorous said:


> I haven't agreed with you for some time lately on this forum but I sure give a hearty agree to your comment here.. I don't believe all young people are idiots who have to learn things the hard way.. I was never like this. I watched carefully, took notes, contemplated many things .. I learned how NOT to be by watching the ugly aftermath of my own Mothers choices..
> 
> I never experienced any either.. but I came very close with the type of men my Mother allowed in her life, into her bed...when I was just 9 yrs old living with her.. it's why I despise bad boys and will never like men who flaunt & think sex is owed to them, using women & having no thought about them the next day.. makes me cringe.. one made comments about me being a Looker someday ...so she told me yrs ago.. when she explained how my Father called her in a RAGE, taking me off of her when he heard about all the men coming to the house .. (funny she didn't want sex with him!)...
> 
> So to this day, I feel my Father likely saved me from a very bad fate had I remained living with her.
> 
> Seeing what her life turned into , I didn't trust men .... I believed in testing them to see what they are really after.... not just Fvcking around...that would have never satisfied me...


Your mom and mine. My sisters and I were not so fortunate. I am always happy when someone escapes the fate my sisters and I did not.

Just so you know, when I refer to myself as a "bad boy" it is not even close to the definition you just gave of the men your mother had. I call them scum.


----------



## norajane

FrenchFry said:


> I'm not being facetious.
> 
> What I have a hard time understanding is if you are at all unclear of what level of consent you have you don't stop, asses the situation and ask questions. Ask questions until she hates you. Ask questions until what she (or he, really) wants is crystal clear. If she can't handle that, what kind of sexual partner are you really jumping in with?
> 
> No assumptions. Rapists LOVE assumptions. Assumptions are what gives rapists plausibility. I'll be clear that I'm not calling anyone in this thread a rapist. Actual factual rapists love using plausiblity of assumption to say "she wanted it, look what she was doing/saying wearing."
> 
> Remove assumption and to me this becomes way less murky.


:iagree:

I don't see why it's such a problem to TALK about sex with the person you want to have sex with before you have sex with them. If you aren't comfortable talking about having sex, then you shouldn't be doing it because good sex requires communication, and lots of it before, during and after and throughout your relationship.

If you think that she'll say no or won't say yes if you bring up the subject instead of just pushing for it, then, yeah, you REALLY shouldn't be having sex.


----------



## Healer

NobodySpecial said:


> Yup. Thankfully the law does not agree with him!


Can you imagine a guy on the stand, being tried for rape...and his defense is "yeah well, she was kissing me, so that meant I was allowed to shove my penis in her vagina".


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anonymous07 said:


> I think guys need to learn that in order for sex to happen the woman needs to be enthusiastic about it or else it should not happen. If she says no, then stop, even if you think she is being "playful". If she is just laying there, stop and back away.


Two things. 

1- My take is that women are often BOTH enthusiastic AND fearful/reserved. Most often, I don't think it is ME or SEX she's afraid of. It's other social bs and conditioned shame. The most common thing I run into is a sense of her that is like "I want to do this, I'm totally into him, but *I'm not supposed to yet*; he'll think I'm easy." External constraints or whatever. Which is crap I'm always going to try to get past. I'm thinking of nothing more than, "I'm totally into this girl and want to have sex with her." It is disheartening seeing women cortort, clearly wanting to have sex with me in that moment, but ducking and weaving so as to not do so due to some bogus constraint or conditioning. When she's saying "UGH! God you're irresistible! (or a common one: "youre killing me!") But I shouldn't do this!" What I see is an arbitrary barrier that is NOT actually HER want. That conflict shouldn't exist, but I think we teach it into girls. If you want to do it, just do it. There shouldn't be any of that external nonsense.

2- as far as her just laying there... as a guy who has had a lot of partners I can definitively say there are a good number of women who just don't do much in bed, particularly initially. Some of these simply lack the confidence or experience... and my leading them to feel more comfortable to express their sexuality without judgment often results in a sexual explosion from them. I don't see how that's anything other than win-win. They were simply shy or inexperienced and I led and taught.

I'll have to inform them that they've been raped.


----------



## Cletus

norajane said:


> :iagree:
> 
> I don't see why it's such a problem to TALK about sex with the person you want to have sex with before you have sex with them. If you aren't comfortable talking about having sex, then you shouldn't be doing it because good sex requires communication, and lots of it before, during and after and throughout your relationship.
> 
> If you think that she'll say no or won't say yes if you bring up the subject instead of just pushing for it, then, yeah, you REALLY shouldn't be having sex.


If I had waited until my wife was comfortable talking about sex before we had sex, we might never have consummated our marriage.

Intellectually I think you're right, but first and foremost, I'm a pragmatist. There are plenty of people out there who are not comfortable discussing sex who are going to be having sex anyway.


----------



## jorgegene

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I didn't say it always leads to sex. I said it is a point along a scale. Making out IS a sexual activity. Every step along that scale is a positive indicator toward sex - don't even say it isn't. You don't make out until you're comfortable with touch. You don't kiss unless you're already comfortable with a hug. You don't have sex until you're comfortable with making out. At each step, someone took the initiative to go there... and the non-initiator goes with it, or refuses it.
> 
> There is no assumption the next step will happen, but no one is wrong for pursuing the next step along that scale. She bears the responsibility of saying no to his move to that next step if she doesn't want it. He wants the next step.
> 
> Take something as simple as a kiss. He may feel the two of them are ready for a kiss after having held hands and becoming comfortable with touch. He wants to kiss her. So what happens? He moves in to kiss her. Advancing. He doesn't ask permission.
> 
> If she's not at the same place he is, she bears the responsibility to withdraw. He is not in the wrong for attempting the next step along the progression. Given a refusal, his burden lies in persuading her that want to kiss him... to increase their connection and comfort level. Even his waiting on her is an act of persuasion. Hey, I'm safe. I'm a good guy, I'll wait and let more time persuade her. Because in reality, he wants to kiss right now. He will and should make another attempt in the future.


the problem with this analysis, though well articulated and objectively sensible, presumes that men and women have exactly equal responsibility emotionally, and physically in the sexual game.
However, I never heard a convincing argument for that to be true. It is true on one level that we should be equals in the sense of sharing the sexual experience. But in quite another sense, our reasons, motivations, and psychology of sex broadly speaking has a vast chasm between us as men and women. The point?
The great deference must be granted to the female sex in this regard. This has been. Sorry to say, but this is one instance where we are not exactly equals, at least not qualitatively.


----------



## ConanHub

Shoto1984 said:


> Really? Are you sure you want to go with all of that?
> 
> A) She seems to have applied her own agenda to my words and used that erroneous interpretation to launch an attack that referenced my family.
> B) Negating the fairness of interpretation and consequences of one's actions based on size, strength etc is indefensible.
> C) The point she (and you) seem to miss is the possible benefit of fairness in getting everyone to understand what is and isn't appropriate.
> D) The offenders appearance is of no consideration at all in this discussion. Assault from a good looking person is somehow supposed to be different from assault from a less good looking person..... ugh.
> C) You may not have been threatened by a woman but I have. I've been bruised and bloodied but I took it and didn't call the cops because I did't want my kids to see their mother being taken away.
> 
> This tread seems to be bait fueled by people with an agenda not people who want to have a rational discussion.


Dude. You just overanalyzed it to death. I gained insight into the female world and shared it. They deal with loads of sh!t we do not all the time. I understand that many, if not most, men do not understand this and I do not blame them. 

It is hard to understand unless you really experience it. I think many women do not understand our world as well.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> Exactly. If she cannot enthusiastically say that she is into having sex.. he needs to walk away.
> 
> Thank you Richard, you hit the nail on the head. This is one of the things that boys need to be taught.
> 
> If men took this attitude, a woman who actually wanted the sex would learn that they have to give the guy a very clear yes.


lol... directly against the notion (upheld by polling of women) that HE ought to make the first moves. That he ought to be bold.

In a culture where women are practically shamed for sexual thoughts, you think men should sit back and wait for her to come out and say "I want sex."

Sounds like puritan paradise.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> You'd think that when the woman/girl freezes would be a HUGE flag to the guy that something is terribly wrong.


It would be. If he noticed.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

that.girl said:


> The whole idea that she should be responsible for stopping him is a little weird to me.
> 
> Let's say you're on a first date with a girl. You're at dinner. You get a burger, she gets a salad. But you want some salad. Would you just take it from her plate without asking? Probably not. You would ask, or if you're lucky, she would offer. Most guys wouldn't just take her food and assume she would stop them if it was a problem.
> 
> Why is it rude to take her salad without her saying it's okay, but not rude to have sex with her without her saying it's okay?


Did you demand guys ask you for a kiss? Or did they just do it when they judged from the current activity, that the time was right to make that step?

Apples and oranges. With property, we tend to go by fairly strict rules of possession. With people, we tend to go by feel.

I've had many girls run up and hug me. Amazingly, not one of them asked.


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> I find wanting sex with someone who does not enthusiastically want it with you is just beyond yucky.


I agree. 

But what I am talking about is someone who is showing enthusiasm but playing hard to get. If there is no enthusiasm after a few minutes, then it stops.


----------



## Buddy400

Anon Pink said:


> Buddy, that too is something I feel great shame about. He didn't deserve that.
> 
> However, based on my experience with reporting molestation as a child, there was NO FVCKING way I would have gone to the police! Not enough money in the world to convince me to go to the police! Horrible horrible experience! This was the 1970's and things were quite different then.


You seem to be saying two different things here:

1) That he didn't deserve to be charged with rape

2) That you didn't consider going to the police because it would have been a horrible experience for you.

If you had felt more comfortable going to the police, he might have been charged with rape, convicted, jailed and marked as a sex offender for the rest of his life. However, you seem to be saying that he didn't deserve that.

So, which is it to be?


----------



## SadSamIAm

Anonymous07 said:


> This and/or you can also ask. My husband(bf at the time) asked if he could kiss me. I thought it was really sweet and considerate of him. Is he a "wuss" or some guy "without balls"? No. He is a gentleman.


He asked once. Does he ask everytime? I don't think anyone would want a relationship where you have to ask permission every step of the way.


----------



## Cletus

FrenchFry said:


> Not to be a *****, but isn't that a huge red flag?


Short answer: yes.

Longer answer:

It's hard to have a reasonable discussion about your sexual preferences or boundaries if you've never been naked with another human (unless you're an eager student), and you can't have sex before marriage if you value chastity. Think back to before you had sex - did you know what you liked about sex yet? You probably assumed that everyone had the same notions of sex that you had. 

Even then, some people are never comfortable talking frankly about sex, even if they are enthusiastic and willing participants. Some men and women are going to end up in relationships where they will have to deal with the ambiguity of "try it and count your fingers afterward" to see if you succeeded.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> I agree with this. In the 1970's nothing at all would have been done. Today? it's a toss up. You were on a date. You have no injuries.


I'm not sure from what Anon is saying that she knows what should have been done. First we need to decide WHAT should be done. Then we can worry about HOW to do it.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening EleGirl
"if you want it you need to take it" is a great game - but I think you still need to be careful. Since there are some things that you want and some things you don't, it can be easy to get confused. If she struggles and says "no" for one thing, but doesn't really mean it, will a highly aroused guy realize that she really means it for something else? She may think it is obvious what she does and doesn't want, but it may not be all that clear. 

I know it breaks the mood a bit but even a really quick discussion: "I want to you take me - but just in case, if I say "red" it really really means stop".

Otherwise there can be really tragic misunderstandings. 




EleGirl said:


> If she says stop, no, pushes the guy away, etc. Those are signals for the guy to stop.
> 
> Any thing that is a mixed signal needs to be taken as a no. Not as, keep working to seduce me. The guy needs to just stop, right there.
> 
> Now if she just wants to play the hard to get game.... she needs to SAY IT OUT LOUD.
> 
> "Aw, come one, if you want it you need to take it."
> 
> I've played this game. it's fun. I've always been very verbal about it, teasing the guy, laughing, etc. It's very clear. I have never played it and just said 'no', etc.'


----------



## Buddy400

Deejo said:


> I even tried it. She laughed and said ... note, "I don't want you to have to ask, ever. I want you to take."


They only want us to *take* when they *want* it. If they don't want it then it's rape. All we have to do is accurately decide if they want it or not. If we guess correctly, we get sex. If we guess wrong, it's jail, suspended, fired. 

It's a high-stakes game. 

And people wonder why young men are spending all their time in their parent's basement playing video games and watching porn. If I were young these days, I'd probably do the same.


----------



## SadSamIAm

FrenchFry said:


> This forum has spools of women and men who will tell you differently. This is on you.


I am a man and I know that when I was young and inexperienced, I was both enthusiastic and fearful/stressed. I remember the first time I took a girls shirt off, I was stressed to the max. Actually felt sick to my stomach I was so nervous. But my pants showed I was very enthusiastic as well.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
I don't think there is wrong with any gradual escalation of intimacy until your partner says no, or gives some other sign of a lack of consent. I view this as very different from pressuring. The key is that they know that you will stop at any point if they tell you to.

In ongoing relationships, the "starting point" for intimacy may be different. On a first date, any contact needs to be careful and non-sexual at first (a touched hand or shoulder is OK). In a long term relationship, it may be perfectly OK to pick up your partner, throw them on the bed and start taking off their clothes if you know from previous experience that they enjoy that sort of thing.


----------



## SadSamIAm

Buddy400 said:


> They only want us to *take* when they *want* it. If they don't want it then it's rape. All we have to do is accurately decide if they want it or not. If we guess correctly, we get sex. If we guess wrong, it's jail, suspended, fired.
> 
> It's a high-stakes game.
> 
> And people wonder why young men are spending all their time in their parent's basement playing video games and watching porn. If I were young these days, I'd probably do the same.


It isn't as bad as this, but it can be very tough to be a guy.

Just compare the advice in this thread to the advice in so many other threads about Maning up, Nice Guy Issues, Women want the bad guy, etc. 

This thread is almost contradictory to what many other threads say that women want.


----------



## that.girl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Did you demand guys ask you for a kiss? Or did they just do it when they judged from the current activity, that the time was right to make that step?
> 
> Apples and oranges. With property, we tend to go by fairly strict rules of possession. With people, we tend to go by feel.
> 
> I've had many girls run up and hug me. Amazingly, not one of them asked.


I don't demand that a guy ask before he kiss me. But i do demand that he has a good reason to think it will be welcome. And that he not kiss me again if it's not. 

But i am an experienced 30 year old woman, dating experienced men. I am not a virginal 16 year old, who lacks clear boundaries and the confidence to enforce them. 
I think there's a big difference there.


----------



## Anonymous07

SadSamIAm said:


> He asked once. Does he ask everytime? I don't think anyone would want a relationship where you have to ask permission every step of the way.


Communication is important in any relationship. If my husband wasn't into it or was acting different from normal when we were making out or about to have sex, I would stop and talk to him about it. It's not so much permission, as it is about mutually enjoying what is happening.


----------



## norajane

SadSamIAm said:


> It isn't as bad as this, but it can be very tough to be a guy.
> 
> Just compare the advice in this thread to the advice in so many other threads about Maning up, Nice Guy Issues, Women want the bad guy, etc.
> 
> This thread is almost contradictory to what many other threads say that women want.


A lot, if not all, of that "manning up" and NMMNG and MMSLP and "women only want bad boys" advice is coming from men, not women.


----------



## Buddy400

I acknowledge that I was a bit over the top and hesitated before posting. But, though it's raw, it's how a lot of men feel.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

ConanHub said:


> I am finding the attitude of missing out on virgins because of a lack of aggression to be very concerning.


It doesn't have to be centered on virgins. It applies across the board... it's just more common the less confident/assertive the woman. The man who makes advances will have sex more than the man who waits on her to do something. No matter how people want to spin it, someone is taking an initiating action for any new activity to happen.

Maybe our worlds are that different, because I've never had a discussion of consent. I certainly don't intend to start asking if I can make moves or not.



ConanHub said:


> I have actually been at a couple of parties where some guy was getting "pushy" with a girl that I could clearly tell was uncomfortable but the idiot just kept it up.


I've seen the same, which is why I purposely refuted the "pushy" characterization. Going in for a kiss when one feels its time for a kiss isn't pushy. Going in for a kiss right after she turned one down is pushy. If she's shot you down anywhere along the scale, then you haven't completed the previous step in the scale. You go back and get to building, and reassess later whether it feels right to try again.



ConanHub said:


> I put a stop to the scene. The girl seemed embarrassed but relieved. The guy started to get mad at me until he looked in my face and saw what I had for him there.


So let me get this straight. You guess a girl is uncomfortable with a guy hitting on her, so you step in and threaten/intimidate him? His best response isn't anger. It's ignoring you as if you're not even there. But hey, you can always assault him for talking right? That's reasonable.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> Not to me. Does it mean you intend to resist, and I should overcome that resistance? Does it mean that you intend to lay there stiff as a board, forcing me to undress you and initiate every action, but hey, that's what you want? Does it mean that if you say no once, you really mean yes, if you way no twice, it's a maybe, if you say no thrice, it's a call to the police? Does it mean we wrestle Grecco-Roman style, best two out of three falls wins?
> 
> I'm not being facetious. It is NOT extremely clear to me until you have defined exactly what "it" is, what "take" means, and what constitutes retraction of that contract.
> 
> 
> 
> And if you feel like belittling my cognitive inability to understand your very clear words, find another whipping boy.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm assuming you want me to take it, which assumes some level of resistance on your part, else I'm not taking anything, we're giving to each other. As soon as you resist, I have been hard-wired from birth to ratchet way-the-hell down immediately. I wouldn't know how to play the game without running the risk of actually offending you, or pushing past a real boundary, or becoming too physical. I'm sure I could learn, but it would take a lot more communication than a simple "If you want it, take it".


When I've done this, it's very clear because I don't say "take me once". I teasing the more fun it is.

I was not "belittling my cognitive inability to understand your very clear words". If you do not understand what's going on in this situation, the you stop. You tell her that you don't understand and that you are not comfortable with it.


This is the reason that people talk about having a safe word. If one of you says the safe word... everything stops.


----------



## that.girl

There's a big difference between telling someone to make sure they have consent, and telling them to ask for permission to touch someone's knee. This keeps getting taken to an extreme place. 
As adults, most of us are able to read the cues of our partners. But when we were young and inexperienced, we could not. That's why we should teach young people to be sure - so they can grow into sexually confident adults. 
Young men don't naturally know that girls might be too scared to say the word no. And i don't understand why there's so much resistance against teaching them that. 
Of course we need to teach our daughters about boundaries as well. But it shouldn't be entirely their responsibility. 
If we teach boys to push, and girls to be the gatekeepers, we do not create sexually healthy adults. I would rather teach my children that sex is shared, not that it's something to be guarded or persuaded into.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> If I had waited until my wife was comfortable talking about sex before we had sex, we might never have consummated our marriage.
> 
> Intellectually I think you're right, but first and foremost, I'm a pragmatist. There are plenty of people out there who are not comfortable discussing sex who are going to be having sex anyway.


So maybe we have identified something else to teach our children.. boys and girls. It's good to talk about sex. Do it before you have sex with someone. If you have sex with someone.. engage in the most intimate act there is, you sure better be able to talk it with them. 

And teach them that if someone won't talk about sex, talk about rules, safe word, etc... walk away from that person. They are sexually inhibited to the point that it will cause problems in the relationship.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> It would be. *If he noticed.*


If he does not notice, it means he's not paying attention to his partner's responses. To me that's at least 50% of sex or more. Sure I want to enjoy it. But I want him to enjoy it so I pay a lot of attention to how my partner responds to everything we are doing.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> I'm not sure from what Anon is saying that she knows what should have been done. First we need to decide WHAT should be done. Then we can worry about HOW to do it.


Anon is experiencing a very common dilemma. When a guy forces himself on a woman, but he did not force her, such as have a knife at her throat, it's confusing... extremely confusing. 

He must have done something that was harmful because of the bleeding that she experienced. My guess is that she suffered internal tares. Clearly, that's a sign that she was forced.

But all her other interactions with him prior to that, he was a good guy that she liked.

So how does she weigh all of this in her head? The two images do not computer when she tries to mesh it into one image.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> If he does not notice, it means he's not paying attention to his partner's responses.


Isn't that essentially saying that "not paying attention to his partner's responses" = Rape?


----------



## tulsy

norajane said:


> A lot, if not all, of that "manning up" and NMMNG and MMSLP and "women only want bad boys" advice is coming from men, not women.


Maybe, but it IS what many men have learned from women.


----------



## EleGirl

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening EleGirl
> "if you want it you need to take it" is a great game - but I think you still need to be careful. Since there are some things that you want and some things you don't, it can be easy to get confused.


I think I need to be a lot clearer. I’ve only done with a man I was in a long-term relationship with.. like my husband. We knew each other well. 

I agree that it’s not something to do with a guy who the woman does not know well and has no sexual history with.



richardsharpe said:


> If she struggles and says "no" for one thing, but doesn't really mean it, will a highly aroused guy realize that she really means it for something else? She may think it is obvious what she does and doesn't want, but it may not be all that clear.


A highly aroused guy can stop at any point. It’s not like they go into a trance. Bottom line, don’t play the game with someone you (man or woman) don’t know well. If she says “no” stop. Like you said in some other post… a woman who says no and means yes… you walk away from her.


richardsharpe said:


> I know it breaks the mood a bit but even a really quick discussion: "I want to you take me - but just in case, if I say "red" it really really means stop".
> 
> Otherwise there can be really tragic misunderstandings.


I agree, it does not take a lot to set up a safe word. It does not mean that some long, drawn out, touchy-feely conversation is needed.


----------



## NobodySpecial

FrenchFry said:


> This forum has spools of women and men who will tell you differently. This is on you.


Yup. Not sure where the men have to make the first move bit comes from either.


----------



## norajane

tulsy said:


> Maybe, but it IS what many men have learned from women.


It's what THOSE men have learned from SOME women. A lot of that advice is coming from people who "pick up" certain types of women who respond to those types of advances. It is not universal, and may just represent a small segment of women.

And when women like me, and others on TAM, say there is no way we would respond favorably to the type of advice men here are given, we are told we don't know what we're talking about.


----------



## SadSamIAm

FrenchFry said:


> I was a wreck losing my virginity. But I have completely different experience than AnonPink because even though I was scared and had no idea what this would be like--it was cool because we both said "yeah, this is what is going down tonight."
> 
> What I would tell my son is what I was told: Wait until you feel ready. If you don't feel ready, you do not have to do it and you can say no.


The problem with this is that it goes against nature. 

Almost all boys and many girls feel ready much before they ARE READY. 

A boy and girl make out both thinking they don't want it to go too far. The girl says no. The guy stops. The girls starts again because she is feeling it. The guy keeps going. This is how it progresses. Sometimes she doesn't say no and it progresses. Sometimes she says no, but a bit more petting makes her change her mind.

The boy may be taught to stop when she says no. She may be taught to say no. But in the heat of the moment, most all teaching goes out the window.

Yes most all guys will stop when no is said. They might try again in a bit, but they will stop before any type of assault occurs. But I think it is pretty common for both genders to change their mind about their boundaries once the making out session starts.

This is where it gets really difficult. A good reason to not be making out in the first place unless you are ready.

This was a fun and exciting time in my life. I remember it fondly. I feel terrible for people like Anon that had such a horrific experience.

Not saying we shouldn't teach our children. Just remember what it was like when you were young and first experimenting. 

We talked to our kids about sex. We told them to wait until they are in a serious relationship. Did they listen? I doubt it. T

This is the reason my daughters were on the pill when they were 17. It was a very tough decision. You want to tell them to abstain. You want to tell them to be careful. But we also know what it was like to be 17 and in the heat of the moment.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> Anon is experiencing a very common dilemma. When a guy forces himself on a woman, but he did not force her, such as have a knife at her throat, it's confusing... extremely confusing.


I understand her dilemma and sympathize with it.

However, people here are calling this a clear case of rape. If a rape has occurred, then the perpetrator should be punished.

This seems to be some of what's going on at campuses where women will report a rape to the college but not to the police. I've heard it's often because they don't necessarily believe that the man should be put into the criminal justice system for what happened. Fair enough. But, if that's the case, how is kicking him out of school with a "sexual assault" on his record any better?

It would seem that a minimum requirement for charging someone with rape should be a belief on the victim's part that he is guilty of a crime. I don't see how it can be had any other way.


----------



## EleGirl

SadSamIAm said:


> It isn't as bad as this, but it can be very tough to be a guy.
> 
> Just compare the advice in this thread to the advice in so many other threads about Maning up, Nice Guy Issues, Women want the bad guy, etc.
> 
> This thread is almost contradictory to what many other threads say that women want.


It's not contradictory at all.

Most women like for their husband/SO to be assertive at times.

That's very different from a guy pushing the limits, and ignoring her when she says "no", "stop", etc.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Well it is true that a lot of women are taught that their sexuality is a currency for buying marriage and have to squelch there natural desire. I think that is something we need to educated our daughters about. You are a sexual being. Be that. It's ok. Pick nice men who see you for who you are. Tell the boys that just want to get in your pant to go screw their own damned selves.


----------



## Buddy400

norajane said:


> It's what THOSE men have learned from SOME women. A lot of that advice is coming from people who "pick up" certain types of women who respond to those types of advances. It is not universal, and may just represent a small segment of women.
> 
> And when women like me, and others on TAM, say there is no way we would respond favorably to the type of advice men here are given, we are told we don't know what we're talking about.


I KNOW that there are lots of women like those on TAM who would not respond favorably to the type of advice men here are given. I am married to one. 

I KNOW that there are lots of women who *would* respond favorably. I divorced two of them.

The problem is that you seem to think you speak for the majority of women. I'm not sure that you do.


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> lol... directly against the notion (upheld by polling of women) that HE ought to make the first moves. That he ought to be bold.


Making the first move is one thing. But after he makes the first move, then she needs to show enthusiasm. She needs to be clear that she's into what's going on.




DvlsAdvc8 said:


> In a culture where women are practically shamed for sexual thoughts, you think men should sit back and wait for her to come out and say "I want sex."
> 
> Sounds like puritan paradise.


There are plenty of women who want sex. Stick to the women who are into it.

If a woman is shameful of sex, she can either change her attitude or find a man who is sensitive her the same that has been placed on her.

If men (not directed at you in particular) want women who are enthusiastic sex partners, then stop shaming women who like sex... stop with the slvt and bad girl shaming.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anon Pink said:


> Failure to say yes is failure to consent.


You're completely incorrect on that fact. No where does the law define rape as the lack of express consent - that is, a verbal "yes".

In fact, her participation in sexual acts leading up to sex, are considered implied consent whether she just lies there doing nothing from that point on or not. If she does not change the status quo, it remains.

Furthermore, the essential legal elements of rape for a competent adult are penetration, force and consent. You also lack force. Force does not exist without resistance, even if that resistance is only a verbal "no". Don't believe me, look it up.

I had implied consent to have sex judging from the make out session. She said no when I advanced. Had I continued and penetrated her, even if she shows no more resistance or participation, THAT is sexual assault. I did not. She kept kissing me, and we mutually kept making out. Some time later, I again slowly drifted my hand into her panties, where I had been stopped before... and was allowed to proceed. Again implied consent. My hands were now in her pants and she was very much an active participant - this is the first penetration. I began undoing her pants soon after and she took my shirt off. Then she helped me remove her pants, I removed mine and we kept grinding, and eventually the tip tease. Finally SHE pressed me deeper, and that was that. Goodbye virginity.

She said no one time. She never said yes. But her actions subsequent to saying no are judged by the law as implied consent. And at no point is forced judged to have existed. 

Implied consent, no force = no second degree sexual assault (basically rape without a weapon).

Maybe you feel differently about what rape is, but this is how it is defined by the law in most states.


----------



## EleGirl

tulsy said:


> Maybe, but it IS what many men have learned from women.


That's like saying women like ice cream.. so dump a ton of it on top of the woman, she'll love it.

There is a fine line. Assertiveness from a guy is great. Being on overbearing, pushy "alpha" is not.

When women have tried to tell guys that a lot of this stuff coming out is not being done in the way women want... they are told that they (the women) don't know what they are talking about.

we'd have to go through scenarios to point out what the difference is between assertiveness and pushy/overbearing are.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> Isn't that essentially saying that "not paying attention to his partner's responses" = Rape?


When a woman has frozen.. and he guy has to shove his penis in her hard enough to hurt her and make her bleed heavily.. that's beyond him just being caught up in the moment.

This is what Anon described.


----------



## Anon Pink

Buddy400 said:


> You seem to be saying two different things here:
> 
> 1) That he didn't deserve to be charged with rape
> 
> 2) That you didn't consider going to the police because it would have been a horrible experience for you.
> 
> If you had felt more comfortable going to the police, he might have been charged with rape, convicted, jailed and marked as a sex offender for the rest of his life. However, you seem to be saying that he didn't deserve that.
> 
> So, which is it to be?


Back into the murky waters... Okay I'll try to be clear.

The 15 year old virgin was very upset. She didn't understand why he did that, why he wanted to do that. She felt abused, stupid, ignorant, absurd, dumb but mostly ashamed. Quite probably if he had called to see me the next day, I doubt very much I would have said no. I felt at complete fault because I froze. Double shame. I didn't want that to happen and I failed to defend myself and speak up. It wasn't until well into the following school year that I came to understand what had happened and I felt comfortable calling what happened rape. 

Regardless, due to my experience dealing with the police when I was 8 years old after a molestation and attempted abduction, even if I had been able to name what happened I would never have gone to the police! I would never ever have done that. Ever!

However, the conflict remained. Was it really rape? It sure felt like it was rape! But if it was rape why did I still like that boy? And I did still like him. As time wore on my fear of him grew and grew and my like of him diminished. Maybe I was rewriting things in order to resolve the conflict? IDK, possible, maybe even likely.

Finally I grew anger. After I got out of the hospital I was spitting mad! Ready to fight to the death! Welcomed the opportunity to punch the sh!t out of anyone! I became the scary person I am today! 

But in my late 30's I had to really examine that event. Through adult eyes, healing eyes, through eyes with a much greater understanding of trauma, of child development, psychology and sex, I could now see what he must have seen. He was Dvls. He was the decent guy who wanted to have sex with the super cute girl from the next neighborhood over. He wanted to have sex, and like Dvls, knew that without taking the lead it wasn't going to happen. But he was young and inexperienced too. He had enough experience to know the specific things to do but not enough to gauge his partner, and certainly not enough to know to talk about it!

He was 18 but also still a kid. In many ways, he was just as ignorant as I was. So NO!! He didn't deserve to branded a rapist and go to jail. If I had a magic wand I think the kids and their parents need to talk together, should something like this happen. I don't think young men are being given the right tools and I KNOW young women sure as hell aren't!

This is why I think we need to have these discussions. Your sons will be taking out my daughters and though I've taught my daughters the language of boundaries, the tools to understand sex play and the permission to own their choices, I understand I am in the minority as a parent.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> The problem with this is that it goes against nature.
> 
> Almost all boys and many girls feel ready much before they ARE READY.
> 
> A boy and girl make out both thinking they don't want it to go too far. The girl says no. The guy stops. The girls starts again because she is feeling it. The guy keeps going. This is how it progresses. Sometimes she doesn't say no and it progresses. Sometimes she says no, but a bit more petting makes her change her mind.
> 
> The boy may be taught to stop when she says no. She may be taught to say no. But in the heat of the moment, most all teaching goes out the window.
> 
> Yes most all guys will stop when no is said. They might try again in a bit, but they will stop before any type of assault occurs. But I think it is pretty common for both genders to change their mind about their boundaries once the making out session starts.
> 
> This is where it gets really difficult. A good reason to not be making out in the first place unless you are ready.
> 
> This was a fun and exciting time in my life. I remember it fondly. I feel terrible for people like Anon that had such a horrific experience.
> 
> Not saying we shouldn't teach our children. Just remember what it was like when you were young and first experimenting.
> 
> We talked to our kids about sex. We told them to wait until they are in a serious relationship. Did they listen? I doubt it. T
> 
> This is the reason my daughters were on the pill when they were 17. It was a very tough decision. You want to tell them to abstain. You want to tell them to be careful. But we also know what it was like to be 17 and in the heat of the moment.


Why do you want to tell them to abstain?


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> It's not contradictory at all.
> 
> Most women like for their husband/SO to be assertive at times.
> 
> That's very different from a guy pushing the limits, and ignoring her when she says "no", "stop", etc.


But we aren't arguing over what to do when she says "no" or "stop". We're arguing how assertive men should be in the absence of these words.

Somewhere along the line I'd like some woman to say "Sure, I want the man I desire to just take me and I know that sounds kind of "rapey". I'm uncomfortable with that in some ways. Let's talk about it".

I, and maybe a lot of other men, feel like women are kind of fvcked up about this whole "take me" / "make sure I really want it before you make a move" thing going on in their heads. It seems like instead of dealing with this themselves; women want men to solve the problem for them. Just teach men to do exactly the right thing at exactly the right time (as if we even knew what that thing or time is).


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> I understand her dilemma and sympathize with it.
> 
> However, people here are calling this a clear case of rape. If a rape has occurred, then the perpetrator should be punished.
> 
> This seems to be some of what's going on at campuses where women will report a rape to the college but not to the police. I've heard it's often because they don't necessarily believe that the man should be put into the criminal justice system for what happened. Fair enough. But, if that's the case, how is kicking him out of school with a "sexual assault" on his record any better?
> 
> It would seem that a minimum requirement for charging someone with rape should be a belief on the victim's part that he is guilty of a crime. I don't see how it can be had any other way.


I believe that colleges are required, by law, to report any reported rape. What I've read is that a lot, if not most, colleges are ignoring that law.


----------



## SadSamIAm

FrenchFry said:


> SadSadIAm, I remember too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a tangent for sure but it leads to a point.
> 
> I wasn't taught to abstain. I was taught that my body is mine and I need to take ownership of it. Even as a silly hormonal teenager I was taught absolute accountability of my own actions.
> 
> As a woman, this means not saying no when I mean yes. What I will teach my son is that until you can understand what yes looks like, it's a no.


And if he is a typical guy, he will be polite and nice. And in the heat of the moment he will initiate in ways to to try to get a yes. If it doesn't work, he will try something else to get a yes.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> And if he is a typical guy, he will be polite and nice. And in the heat of the moment he will initiate in ways to to try to get a yes. If it doesn't work, he will try something else to get a yes.


Super Ew. Why does a no not mean moving right along?


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> Why do you want to tell them to abstain?


Because I don't think that many teenagers are ready for it. Their bodies are, but their minds aren't.

I went through a tough break up at the end of grade twelve. Screwed me up for a couple of years. Still affects me a bit at times. Getting intimate that young, had a lot to do with how hurt I was.


----------



## EleGirl

Anon Pink said:


> Back into the murky waters... Okay I'll try to be clear.
> 
> The 15 year old virgin was very upset. She didn't understand why he did that, why he wanted to do that. She felt abused, stupid, ignorant, absurd, dumb but mostly ashamed. Quite probably if he had called to see me the next day, I doubt very much I would have said no. I felt at complete fault because I froze. Double shame. I didn't want that to happen and I failed to defend myself and speak up. It wasn't until well into the following school year that I came to understand what had happened and I felt comfortable calling what happened rape.
> 
> Regardless, due to my experience dealing with the police when I was 8 years old after a molestation and attempted abduction, even if I had been able to name what happened I would never have gone to the police! I would never ever have done that. Ever!
> 
> However, the conflict remained. Was it really rape? It sure felt like it was rape! But if it was rape why did I still like that boy? And I did still like him. As time wore on my fear of him grew and grew and my like of him diminished. Maybe I was rewriting things in order to resolve the conflict? IDK, possible, maybe even likely.
> 
> Finally I grew anger. After I got out of the hospital I was spitting mad! Ready to fight to the death! Welcomed the opportunity to punch the sh!t out of anyone! I became the scary person I am today!
> 
> But in my late 30's I had to really examine that event. Through adult eyes, healing eyes, through eyes with a much greater understanding of trauma, of child development, psychology and sex, I could now see what he must have seen. He was Dvls. He was the decent guy who wanted to have sex with the super cute girl from the next neighborhood over. He wanted to have sex, and like Dvls, knew that without taking the lead it wasn't going to happen. But he was young and inexperienced too. He had enough experience to know the specific things to do but not enough to gauge his partner, and certainly not enough to know to talk about it!
> 
> He was 18 but also still a kid. In many ways, he was just as ignorant as I was. So NO!! He didn't deserve to branded a rapist and go to jail. If I had a magic wand I think the kids and their parents need to talk together, should something like this happen. I don't think young men are being given the right tools and I KNOW young women sure as hell aren't!
> 
> This is why I think we need to have these discussions. Your sons will be taking out my daughters and though I've taught my daughters the language of boundaries, the tools to understand sex play and the permission to own their choices, I understand I am in the minority as a parent.


Parents used to be very careful with their children to prevent this sort of thing. 

When I was young we were not allowed with the opposite sex without someone with us. When I was 14 my crush invited me to have dinner with his parents. My parents made one of my older sisters come with us. 

Today, this is considered old fashion. No one wants this. We tell teens that teen pregnancy is bad, that they need to be careful, etc. Then we turn them out on their own, with little experience and guess what happens? A lot of bad and hurtful stuff.

I'm not saying that going back to chaperones on dates is the answser. But what's going on is not the answer either.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

EleGirl said:


> Making he first move is one thing. But after he makes the first move, then she needs to show enthusiasm. She needs to be clear that she's into what's going on.


Enthusiasm is implied consent. Even after an initial no, continued participation in sexual activity is again implied consent. Her actions are clear. Most sexual judgments are made without anything expressly said.



EleGirl said:


> If a woman is shameful of sex, she can either change her attitude or find a man who is sensitive her the same that has been placed on her.


I generally don't run off thinking such a woman is a dud. If I like her, I'm willing to work with her reserve help change that attitude. Hell, I enjoy trying to get them out of that shell/cage.



EleGirl said:


> If men (not directed at you in particular) want women who are enthusiastic sex partners, then stop shaming women who like sex... stop with the slvt and bad girl shaming.


I agree, and don't do it. If I say "bad girl", it has a completely positive spin. I like a good, bad girl. And honestly, slvt isn't in my spoken vocabulary. I like dirty talk and I still avoid slvt. It's just not one of my words.


----------



## SadSamIAm

Buddy400 said:


> But we aren't arguing over what to do when she says "no" or "stop". We're arguing how assertive men should be in the absence of these words.
> 
> Somewhere along the line I'd like some woman to say "Sure, I want the man I desire to just take me and I know that sounds kind of "rapey". I'm uncomfortable with that in some ways. Let's talk about it".
> 
> I, and maybe a lot of other men, feel like women are kind of fvcked up about this whole "take me" / "make sure I really want it before you make a move" thing going on in their heads. It seems like instead of dealing with this themselves; women want men to solve the problem for them. Just teach men to do exactly the right thing at exactly the right time (as if we even knew what that thing or time is).


I agree with this. Happens all the time in my marriage. I go through hoops trying to figure out her mood, how to approach her, etc. Often causes disagreements, fights, etc.

But always after a good session of making love and being together, I get the "You understand me so well. Thank you for being so patient. We need to do this more often."

Been married for almost 30 years. Sucks big time. But not enough to leave as I love her very much.


----------



## Buddy400

FrenchFry said:


> I see women placing accountability on women to not give ambiguous symbols.


I would LOVE to see that.

If that is the case, what's wrong with "No means no"? Not the least bit ambiguous. Everybody understood that.

Instead, we get "Affirmative consent". And then it's not even about hearing the word "Yes". It's also about "reading body language", which is all about ambiguity.


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> Super Ew. Why does a no not mean moving right along?


A strong no, and moving right along happens. 

But a weak no, followed by more making out. Followed by her touching you. Followed by her letting it go a bit farther. etc. etc. etc.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Anon Pink said:


> I'm not going to argue with you Dvls. Frankly, you make me ill.
> 
> Failure to say yes is no consent. Silence is no consent. Frozen is no consent.
> 
> Do you have sons? If so please PM me your name and state just so I can make sure your sons never come in contact with my daughters!


I do, and I pray he doesn't meet your daughters. I don't want to deal with their false rape accusations because they're too afraid to say no when my boy moves on from her slobbering and grinding all over him making out.

Heads up: if you can't say no, you have no business making out. You have no business having any sort of sexual contact for that matter.

People who make up their own definitions of rape because they don't like the legal definition make me ill.

Fair is fair.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> Because I don't think that many teenagers are ready for it. Their bodies are, but their minds aren't.
> 
> I went through a tough break up at the end of grade twelve. Screwed me up for a couple of years. Still affects me a bit at times. Getting intimate that young, had a lot to do with how hurt I was.


I think a lot of this is attitude. We have this attitude that sex is the Big ****ing Deal. If there was less pressure, our kids could experiment and fail. And learn. My kids fail and learn. They ski. They are not idiots. They wear helmets. They have no interest in dying. And I can trust them to make smart choices because I have trusted them to make smart choices. And they generally do.

Sex is important. But why we think that achieving a certain number of years of existence is going to give wisdom I cannot understand. When they are toddlers, they fall on the playground. We brush them off, go over what happened. 

I have had many bad sexual experiences including rape. I am not sexually ****ed up. I was raised like most of you. GIRLS DON'T HAVE SEX CUZ IT'S ALL KINDS OF SOMETHING. I decided that that was messed up. I had a bad experience, like falling on the playground, and thought, gee I don't think I will do that again.

Instead we think that we will achieve an age at which sex will be sunshine and light. Ain't gonna happen.


----------



## SadSamIAm

FrenchFry said:


> Then one of the things to teach our sons is that this is messed up.


You can teach them that it is messed up. But it is natural.

I wonder how many teenaged girls just let a guy touch her breasts the first time he tried. Or how many told him to do it so he didn't have to try. Not many is my guess.


----------



## Cletus

Buddy400 said:


> I would LOVE to see that.
> 
> If that is the case, what's wrong with "No means no"? Not the least bit ambiguous. Everybody understood that.


"No means no" sure seemed to me to be the best available unambiguous, least likely to fail, best method of last resort solution. 

I would put failure to be able to say "no" on the same moral footing as failure to take "no" for an answer. 

We teach the guys to ask for affirmation, read body language, be kind lovers, and they will rarely hear the word. The buffoons will have to be told directly. Nobody gets accidentally raped.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> I believe that colleges are required, by law, to report any reported rape. What I've read is that a lot, if not most, colleges are ignoring that law.


Colleges are not required to report rape to law enforcement. They are required to report it to some government bureaucracy having to do with Title IX crap. God knows what good that'll do. Maybe affect their government funding or something.

Not reporting to the police is often seen as a feature, not a bug.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> You can teach them that it is messed up. But it is natural.


No. It isn't. 



> I wonder how many teenaged girls just let a guy touch her breasts the first time he tried. Or how many told him to do it so he didn't have to try. Not many is my guess.


I spoke to my son about "tried" and "let" the other day. He thought is was completely stupid. Why would anyone want that? His words, not mine.


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> No. It isn't.
> 
> 
> 
> I spoke to my son about "tried" and "let" the other day. He thought is was completely stupid. Why would anyone want that? His words, not mine.


You might want to explain a bit more.

He thought it was stupid to try to touch a girls breasts or he thought it was stupid for a girl to let him touch them.

Maybe he thinks it is stupid for a girl not to let him! 

Maybe you need to talk a bit more with him.


----------



## that.girl

We ARE teaching our girls to say no. But sometimes they fail to do that, because they're silly teenagers. And we tell them to wait until they're ready, but they think they're ready for everything, because they're silly teenagers. 
That's why we're looking for a fail-safe. Because what we have been doing isn't always working.


----------



## Blonde

I'm sorry about what happened to you Anon. Are you OK? (Got to be super triggering to share that and get such a deafening lack of empathy and understanding! and have it turned back around on YOU the way I read the responses :banghead: )



Anon Pink said:


> Do you have sons? If so please PM me your name and state just so I can make sure your sons never come in contact with my daughters!


I seriously spent 10 seconds hoping that he has a vasectomy and will not *ever* procreate.

I watched this video with my 17 yod yesterday http://youtu.be/w-zWq_Xzw_g Look at 4:45 for the EIGHT year old talking about how the "marriage" was consummated.... 
D I S T U R B I N G!


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> No. It isn't.
> I spoke to my son about "tried" and "let" the other day. He thought is was completely stupid. Why would anyone want that? His words, not mine.


Without his age, it's hard to know what that means.

Everyone knows breasts have cooties.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> You might want to explain a bit more.
> 
> He thought it was stupid to try to touch a girls breasts or he thought it was stupid for a girl to let him touch them.


He thought the entire conversation that this was something to try. And that it was a girl's job to let. He sees his mother, I mean not in the flesh!, actively interested in his father. And it just does not seem interesting to him to "try" to cop a feel. He would not be interested if she were not right there with him.


That language, itself, speaks to trying to get something off a girl. He would not do that. He would not even be interested in doing that.



> Maybe he thinks it is stupid for a girl not to let him!
> 
> Maybe you need to talk a bit more with him.


We're doing just fine, thanks.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Cletus said:


> Without his age, it's hard to know what that means.
> 
> Everyone knows breasts have cooties.


He is 14.


----------



## Cletus

that.girl said:


> We ARE teaching our girls to say no. But sometimes they fail to do that, because they're silly teenagers. And we tell them to wait until they're ready, but they think they're ready for everything, because they're silly teenagers.
> That's why we're looking for a fail-safe. Because what we have been doing isn't always working.


"No" is that failsafe. I'm sorry it has to land on one gender disproportionately, but then I have to lift all of the heavy things around the house.

What better failsafe could you possibly design other than equipping every girl with a chastity belt and a four digit pin?


----------



## Anon Pink

Thanks Blonde, yes I'm good. I feel like people have been pretty considerate, I haven't felt blamed.

This is a difficult situation and I feel like it's important for PARENTS to understand what consent looks like and what LACK of consent looks like.

It is unfortunate that 1 or 2 men here refuse to try to understand, but I think most of the men here really are TRYING to understand. And that really all we can ask.

I appreciate the shout out!


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> He is 14.


Wait a year or two. 

Also, you might want to understand that teenagers tell their mothers what they want to hear.


----------



## Cletus

FrenchFry said:


> No means no is a starting point but as illustrated in this thread "no" isn't taken seriously at all.
> 
> The word "yes" is really easy to decipher. Reading body language isn't and to stop these experiences for women it's way less experience-based to teach our kids to wait for "YES" instead of trying to wear down a no.


I cannot agree.

Teaching them to wait for a yes is easy. Teaching them when to ask for a YES is an order of magnitude harder than teaching them to accept NO _under any and all circumstances_. 

Is there an invisible unicorn under your chair? What about now? Have you checked in the last five seconds? How about now?

It's like right-of-way for a pedestrian. You can be morally right, step off a curb and be dead, or you can accept that others are ignorant, careless, distracted, or rude and stay alive. If you do not say "no" and mean it, you are injecting ambiguity into the mix. It doesn't matter if you're morally correct.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

ConanHub said:


> I have had a couple of girls be very enthusiastic about making out but seem uncomfortable or have their enthusiasm drop off when I started touching them below the belt or started to remove clothing. I stopped immediately.
> 
> Seemed pretty clear to me that those girls wanted to explore sexuality with their clothes still on. They even wanted to intertwine and grind enthusiastically but no further. I may have been a little disappointed but it was still a lot of fun and I could not even conceive proceeding if they were not hot and into it.


Excuse my saying so, but this is weirdly naïve sounding to me. Just because a woman shuts you down does not mean she's not hot and into it. Just because she's not ready to go that far, doesn't mean she's not hot and into it. Women have a LOT of reasons. One is even that they're just not done with making out. Just because she said no 20 minutes ago doesn't mean she can't change her mind.



ConanHub said:


> I am about the furthest thing from a wuss imaginable. I have never lost a fight had many sexual partners before marriage and really was the guy that took the hot girl home, more instances of her taking me home actually and I have never been "pushy" to the point of sex with anyone of them.
> 
> I have only been aggressive with my wife after some time into our relationship and after much communication and consent.
> 
> I don't think any man should employ aggression or a pushy attitude with new or even newer partners. That seriously belongs in the realm of a LTR.


It's not about being a wuss vs being aggressive. I'm not aggressive. I'm assertive. I'm not pushy. I'm persuasive. There is a HUGE difference. I don't agree with employing aggression or a pushy attitude with a new partner or an LTR.



ConanHub said:


> Even if a girl seemed uncomfortable, I would stop and ask some questions.


I've never been with a girl who seemed uncomfortable. They all have a line... and that line gradually moves. Comfort builds. That's a natural process - whether it reaches that point over the course of a night, or many nights. I mean, in the case of a virgin, I knew she's a virgin long before we got that far.



ConanHub said:


> I asked if they were virgins, they all said no. I would also ask if they wanted to proceed, they all said yes and some even gave me instructions on how to get them more revved up.


Are you for real? This sounds about as dispassionate as I can imagine sex being. Would you like to proceed? Press 1.

You must be hot as f because us regular guys are going to get some retarded looks asking, "do you want to proceed?" 

Her response: "My hand is on your D..., no sh*t Sherlock!" In practice, confirmation questions make you look unsure of yourself. Are you sure you want to do this? Are you really really sure?

Safe to say, we have very different experience in this regard.


----------



## that.girl

Cletus said:


> "No" is that failsafe. I'm sorry it has to land on one gender disproportionately, but then I have to lift all of the heavy things around the house.
> 
> What better failsafe could you possibly design other than equipping every girl with a chastity belt and a four digit pin?


I suggest teaching boys what a non-verbal no looks like, instead of teaching them to only look for a verbal one. 
And to ask a question if they're not sure about the signals they're getting.
Teach them about no AND yes. Both genders, not just the girls.


----------



## Cletus

that.girl said:


> I suggest teaching boys what a non-verbal no looks like, instead of teaching them to only look for a verbal one.
> And to ask a question if they're not sure about the signals they're getting.


We both agree that both need to be taught. But neither of those is the failsafe. "NO" is the failsafe. No is the point where all ambiguity is removed.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Ok teaching our children how to remove rape from our culture. NobodySpecial's comprehensive guide

- When you son is little, he is going to be fascinated with his penis. This is not a shameful thing. Tell him that it is not appropriate in public then leave him alone!

- From the time that your children, boys and girls, are very small, allow them to experience the REAL consequences of their actions, obviously with scaffolds to prevent permanent permanent damage. They spill? No biggie, they clean it up. They hurt someone? Remedy and amends. They unbuckle their seat belt. **** I can sit here all day. ...

- Expect them to do their best. They will. Explain why you are expecting it. Explain that it is your job to raise the best them that they can be. Don't expect them to be ****ty *******s. They will. Then you will be stuck in an endless loop of punishments and ****ty behavior. Understand that their behavior is messages to you about what their screwed up little brains are working on.

- Do NOT protect your daughter from consequences. Teach her to own her behavior. That she is a girl does not mean that she is weak or stupid.

- Talk in your home about things like honesty, integrity, love. Talk in your home about things like injustice, ignorance and hate.

- Model a healthy sex life for your kids. Not in prime time and living color. But lock the door and tell them that they will be fine until Mom and Dad have finished their private time.

There is more. But I just got tired.


----------



## Buddy400

I've been flipping back and forth between this thread and one where women are talking about how women want men to dominate them in the bedroom.

My head hurts. 

Time to take a break.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Healer said:


> That's one of the rapiest statements I've ever read.


Cool. The law calls it implied consent.


----------



## that.girl

Cletus said:


> We both agree that both need to be taught. But neither of those is the failsafe. "NO" is the failsafe. No is the point where all ambiguity is removed.


Yes, NO is a failsafe. But we're treating it as if it's the only option, and it's not.
I'm hearing so many men saying "it's okay if she doesn't say no." And so many women saying "sometimes it's not ok." And so many men saying those women are wrong. It's frustrating. 
We're trying to say that sometimes a girl is to frightened and intimidated to say no, and being told that's too bad, say no anyway. It's not always that easy. 

I was afraid if i said no, he would hate me forever. Teenage girls are silly like that. If he had asked, i might have found the courage to say no without feeling judged. He didn't ask. I didn't participate, i laid there and took it. He was apparently fine with that.

I wish i had said no. I didn't. I wish he had asked. He didn't.

Now in my situation, he knew better and I did not. I don't call what happened to me rape (but understand why some do). I call it being taken advantage of. But it could have been avoided, if he had not expected a silly teenage girl to know how to enforce boundaries she had never even seen before.


----------



## Anon Pink

Buddy400 said:


> I would LOVE to see that.
> 
> If that is the case, what's wrong with "No means no"? Not the least bit ambiguous. Everybody understood that.
> 
> Instead, we get "Affirmative consent". And then it's not even about hearing the word "Yes". It's also about "reading body language", which is all about ambiguity.


Buddy, there have been a few times when men have posted scenarios from their past in which they got mixed signals. Each and every woman who replied to those posts stated essentially the same thing.

If you are getting mixed signal do not proceed until those signals are crystal clear!

If she says she wants you to just take her, then you back up a step and ask her, "so you want me to pretend to force you to have sex with me? I can do that but we're going to need a safe word, so tell me your safe word."

If your son wants to know how to tell if a girl is going to be okay with having her boobs touched, what do you tell him?

What if your son needs to know how to get from 2nd to 3rd base?

I have had those in depth conversations with my daughters on numerous occasions! "Honey, if boob touching is okay with you but diving into your panties isn't, you must be ready to say no and mean it." 

Like Frenchfry, I have taught my daughters to own their body and their decisions. I sit them down periodically and ask them, "you've been going out with this boy for a few months, where is your comfort level with the physical intimacy? Do you want more, or less? Are you comfortable asking for more or less? Do you two talk about how far things are progressing and where the stop point is?"

My youngest is now 15 and believe it not, I know everything they've done together and I know where their current stop point is.

I'll be damned if I send my daughters out into the work ignorant and ill equipped to deal with boys! And I'm so sad that I hear over and over again that I am the only mom among all of their friends who talks this way.


----------



## Cletus

FrenchFry said:


> Maybe I'm giving a 4 year old too much credit here but he doesn't blurt out answers without waiting for his teacher to point at him and say his name.
> 
> Yeah people are going to be distracted and dumb. If I had a daughter I'd teach her that people are ****ty mind readers...I'm teaching the same concept to my son.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Ok, let's try an exercise:

I want to ...

Hold your hand.
Kiss you.
Touch your face
Touch your arm
Touch your thigh
Kiss your neck
Touch your breast through your clothes
Touch your ass with your clothes on
Touch your crotch with your clothes on
Grind on you
Help you take off your shirt
Touch your naked breast 
Touch you naked below the waist
Attempt to manually stimulate you
Attempt to orally stimulate you
Attempt intercourse

For which of these should I ask permission? Did I miss any that I didn't even think to ask? If the answer to the second question was "yes", for you or for any other woman, we're headed for a misunderstanding.

Counter that with the notion that if I try anything on that list, or anything not on that list, and you say no, I stop.


----------



## Anon Pink

Buddy400 said:


> I've been flipping back and forth between this thread and one where women are talking about how women want men to dominate them in the bedroom.
> 
> My head hurts.
> 
> Time to take a break.


I know I get how that must feel!

But the other thread is consenting domination. Never assume it's welcome.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> Yup. Thankfully the law does not agree with him!


Shall I cite cases? I thought that might be a over the top.

You ladies are absolutely wrong on this. Participating in a make out session is implied sexual consent. If you don't show any further resistance to his sexual actions, the status quo remains. You're missing two essential elements of any rape case: force (requires resistance, even verbal) and lack of consent. Existing cases have shown overt sexual behavior is implied consent.

There has never been a successful sexual assault prosecution on "I was groping him, then I froze because he unzipped my pants and he had his way with me while I layed there."


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> Ok, let's try an exercise:
> 
> I want to ...
> 
> Hold your hand.
> Kiss you.
> Touch your face
> Touch your arm
> Touch your thigh
> Kiss your neck
> Touch your breast through your clothes
> Touch your ass with your clothes on
> Touch your crotch with your clothes on
> Grind on you
> Help you take off your shirt
> Touch your naked breast
> Touch you naked below the waist
> Attempt to manually stimulate you
> Attempt to orally stimulate you
> Attempt intercourse
> 
> For which of these should I ask permission? Did I miss any that I didn't even think to ask? If the answer to the second question was "yes", for you or for any other woman, we're headed for a misunderstanding.
> 
> Counter that with the notion that if I try anything on that list, or anything not on that list, and you say no, I stop.



I'll play along...

At each of the moves on your list, you move slowly closer, you lean back and look her in the eye. You say, "okay with this?" And if you don't get an answer you do not proceed. If she returns to passionate kissing, and you're thinking she is playing coy you lean back again and say, " don't be coy, don't play with me. I want to touch you so I need a no or a yes." Anything other than a no or a yes means this chick has issues with her sexuality and doesn't own it. At that point you back way the hell up and take her home!


----------



## that.girl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Shall I cite cases? I thought that might be a over the top.
> 
> You ladies are absolutely wrong on this. Participating in a make out session is implied sexual consent. If you don't show any further resistance to his sexual actions, the status quo remains. You're missing two essential elements of any rape case: force (requires resistance, even verbal) and lack of consent. Existing cases have shown overt sexual behavior is implied consent.
> 
> There has never been a successful sexual assault prosecution on "I was groping him, then I froze because he unzipped my pants and he had his way with me while I layed there."


Participating in a make out session is consent to make out. Participating in petting is consent to touch. Etc. 

Letting you sit on my couch is not consenting to letting you sleep in my bed. One step at a time.


----------



## heartsbeating

Buddy400 said:


> I've been flipping back and forth between this thread and one where women are talking about how women want men to dominate them in the bedroom.
> 
> My head hurts.
> 
> Time to take a break.


The key word is _want_. 

Dominant play does not equate to lack of consent.


I find some of the views on this thread pretty disturbing. To the women who have been victims, I feel very saddened.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
How about this:

1) never have sex with someone unless you are sure they are consenting

2) Always make your consent (or lack of same) clear for what is going on at the moment.


If everyone follows #1, than people who don't obey #2 will spend a lot if time being friendly with their own hands....


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

FrenchFry said:


> I'd be more inclined to believe no is a failsafe if there weren't men who believe one action is consent for another.


I don't care about belief. I care about law and precedent.

Making out is an overt sexual act. Engaging in overtly sexual actions is implied consent.

Believe what you will. This is what the courts have ruled. ie - the opinions that actually matter as far as what constitutes rape.


----------



## that.girl

Cletus said:


> Ok, let's try an exercise:
> 
> I want to ...
> 
> Hold your hand. - i squeeze your hand. Consent.
> Kiss you. - i put my tongue in your mouth. Consent.
> Touch your face
> Touch your arm
> Touch your thigh
> Kiss your neck. - happy sigh. Consent.
> Touch your breast through your clothes. - i lean in. Consent.
> Touch your ass with your clothes on
> Touch your crotch with your clothes on. - i moan and press closer. Consent.
> Grind on you
> Help you take off your shirt
> Touch your naked breast
> Touch you naked below the waist. - i touch you. Consent.
> Attempt to manually stimulate you
> Attempt to orally stimulate you
> Attempt intercourse
> 
> For which of these should I ask permission? Did I miss any that I didn't even think to ask? If the answer to the second question was "yes", for you or for any other woman, we're headed for a misunderstanding.
> 
> Counter that with the notion that if I try anything on that list, or anything not on that list, and you say no, I stop.


I'm not doing the whole list, you get the point. Non-verbal signals in sex are just as important as verbal.


----------



## that.girl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I don't care about belief. I care about law and precedent.
> 
> Making out is an overt sexual act. Engaging in overtly sexual actions is implied consent.
> 
> Believe what you will. This is what the courts have ruled. ie - the opinions that actually matter as far as what constitutes rape.


Is the point of this discussion what is legal, or what is emotionally damaging?


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I don't care about belief. I care about law and precedent.
> 
> 
> 
> Making out is an overt sexual act. Engaging in overtly sexual actions is implied consent.
> 
> 
> 
> Believe what you will. This is what the courts have ruled. ie - the opinions that actually matter as far as what constitutes rape.



According to most legal statutes of rape laws concerning the issue of consent:

*Consent *
_Consent is clear permission between intimate partners that what they are doing is okay and safe. To consent to something – like being sexual – means you confidently agree to do it based on your own free will without any influence or pressure. _

Not sure how making out to confidently agreement without influence and pressure fit together. Just saying.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

I can't keep up with the thread. lol 

It's on page 34 and I'm still reading page 28... 

Bottom line ladies, don't think your freezing up after makeout session turns to sex = rape. Per the legal definition of rape... second degree sexual assault in most states, it is not. 

He's also well with his right to continue to persuade and entice you without it being rape if you're right there continuing to be sexual with him. At any point, you can say no, and you can leave. The power to end everything is right there. Zero ambiguity.

Engaging in sexually explicit behavior with someone is in fact considered implied consent by the courts. Men are not required to get express consent for sex. You can expressly revoke any consent at any time. Or, you can get up and walk out without saying a word (implied). If you don't have those elements, you fail on consent and on force.


----------



## that.girl

Just because a court doesn't call it rape doesn't mean it won't royally mess a girl up. 
Call the situation a hamburger if you want, that girl still feels violated, because that guy didn't think it was important to make sure he was welcome after he got a lukewarm response.


----------



## EleGirl

Blonde said:


> I watched this video with my 17 yod yesterday http://youtu.be/w-zWq_Xzw_g Look at 4:45 for the EIGHT year old talking about how the "marriage" was consummated....
> D I S T U R B I N G!


Very disturbing video.


----------



## Anon Pink

that.girl said:


> Is the point of this discussion what is legal, or what is emotionally damaging?


Excellent point!

This is why I keep shaking my head. What happened to me wasn't legally rape. But it sure as hell felt like it. It damaged me. I don't believe that boy intended for any of that. I don't believe most of the men on this thread would ever intend to damage a girl or a woman. 

Own your sexuality. Make your partners own theirs. Teach your kids to own theirs. Teach your kids to make their partners own theirs.

On a side note, I showed my newest toy to my 25 year old daughter who wants one for Christmas. That's what owning your sexuality looks like!


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> According to most legal statutes of rape laws concerning the issue of consent:
> 
> *Consent *
> _Consent is clear permission between intimate partners that what they are doing is okay and safe. To consent to something – like being sexual – means you confidently agree to do it based on your own free will without any influence or pressure. _
> 
> Not sure how making out to confidently agreement without influence and pressure fit together. Just saying.


Most statutes refer only to consent. Consent can be express or implied. Posting the definition of consent doesn't change anything. Participation in explicitly sexual behavior with someone IS deemed implied consent. If you do not subsequently say no, the implied consent remains.

I'll look up some cases tonight if I have time, but it's gym time right now. Night everyone.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> I've been flipping back and forth between this thread and one where women are talking about how women want men to dominate them in the bedroom.
> 
> My head hurts.
> 
> Time to take a break.


Can someone please post a link to the thread where women are saying that they want men to dominate them in the bedroom?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

that.girl said:


> Just because a court doesn't call it rape doesn't mean it won't royally mess a girl up.
> Call the situation a hamburger if you want, that girl still feels violated, because that guy didn't think it was important to make sure he was welcome after he got a lukewarm response.


Want to reply to this one real fast.

I sympathize with this argument. But I also doubt men in these situations intend to mess a girl up. Just because she feels hurt, doesn't mean he did wrong.

Speak up. Say no. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be engaging in any sexual activity.


----------



## that.girl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Want to reply to this one real fast.
> 
> I sympathize with this argument. But I also doubt men in these situations intend to mess a girl up. Just because she feels hurt, doesn't mean he did wrong.
> 
> Speak up. Say no. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be engaging in any sexual activity.


Doesn't mean he did right either. 

She should be responsible enough to say no. He should be responsible enough to get consent, verbal or non-verbal. If he can't do that, he shouldn't be having sex either.


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I don't care about belief. I care about law and precedent.
> 
> 
> 
> Making out is an overt sexual act. Engaging in overtly sexual actions is implied consent.






DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Most statutes refer only to consent. Consent can be express or implied. Posting the definition of consent doesn't change anything. Participation in explicitly sexual behavior with someone IS deemed implied consent. If you do not subsequently say no, the implied consent remains.



So posting a legal definition doesn't change anything? Ok, I don't agree, but we are free to express our opinions.

I'm not sure how one defines implied consent based on your first quote (listed above) , but again I simply don't agree, but we are free to express our opinions.


----------



## ConanHub

This is not a legal argument thread. If you set it up right, you could technically murder without legal ramifications. Subject for another thread.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Bottom line ladies, don't think your *freezing up* after makeout session turns to sex = rape. Per the legal definition of rape... second degree sexual assault in most states, it is not.
> 
> He's also well with his right to continue to persuade and entice you without it being rape *if you're right there continuing to be sexual with him. * At any point, you can say no, and you can leave. The power to end everything is right there. Zero ambiguity.


By definition, freezing up means that is frozen, not moving. It means that she is no longer “right there continuing to be sexual with him.”


----------



## EleGirl

that.girl said:


> Just because a court doesn't call it rape doesn't mean it won't royally mess a girl up.
> 
> Call the situation a hamburger if you want, that girl still feels violated, because that guy didn't think it was important to make sure he was welcome after he got a lukewarm response.


Apparently that she's messed up does not matter. All that matters is that he got what he wants by stretching the limits of the law.

If I've ever heard an argument that supports women cutting men off sexually who they are not married to, this is it.


----------



## Buddy400

heartsbeating said:


> The key word is _want_.
> 
> Dominant play does not equate to lack of consent.
> 
> 
> I find some of the views on this thread pretty disturbing. To the women who have been victims, I feel very saddened.


I fully understand that there is a big difference between the two.

However, when dealing with the general question of what women want, that's two completely different views.

Is a woman who wants a man to "dominate her in the bedroom" really going to be attracted to a man that goes to great lengths to get "enthusiastic consent" before touching her boob?

I mean, there's got to be a lot of correlation between "dominant in the bedroom" guys and guys like devil's advocate. Right? There's got to be a lot of correlation between guys like Cletus and I who would never do anything a woman didn't want and failing in the "dominate in the bedroom" category. Right? 

Women always complain about men wanting women to be ****s in the bedroom and angels in the kitchen (or however it goes). Don't men have a reason to complain about women who want them to passively "respect their boundaries" and then dominate them sexually? I understand that you can't have both but, at least, women can be honest enough to pick which one you really want. Women could at least acknowledge that they are a part of the problem. They could stop fvcking devil's advocate all the time and give Cletus some of the action

Let's try trading one thing women do wrong for each thing men do wrong and then maybe we can all be a little less defensive.


----------



## Buddy400

that.girl said:


> Just because a court doesn't call it rape doesn't mean it won't royally mess a girl up.
> Call the situation a hamburger if you want, that girl still feels violated, because that guy didn't think it was important to make sure he was welcome after he got a lukewarm response.


Let's call a Hamburger a Hamburger and a Hot Dog a Hot Dog.

The two keep getting lumped into the same category (Fast Food?) and so the conversation goes round and round.

Why is it so important to use the same term for everything from violent, forcible stranger rape to "unwanted groping"? Does it seem like it trivializes "unwanted groping"? If so, doesn't it also trivialize violent rape?


----------



## Healer

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Cool. The law calls it implied consent.


Uh huh. How is Afghanistan this time of year?


----------



## that.girl

Buddy400 said:


> Let's call a Hamburger a Hamburger and a Hot Dog a Hot Dog.
> 
> The two keep getting lumped into the same category (Fast Food?) and so the conversation goes round and round.
> 
> Why is it so important to use the same term for everything from violent, forcible stranger rape to "unwanted groping"? Does it seem like it trivializes "unwanted groping"? If so, doesn't it also trivialize violent rape?


Is there an established word for Anon's and my situations? The only one that comes to mind for me is date rape, but even that doesn't quite fit.


----------



## Healer

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Shall I cite cases? I thought that might be a over the top.
> 
> You ladies are absolutely wrong on this. Participating in a make out session is implied sexual consent. If you don't show any further resistance to his sexual actions, the status quo remains. You're missing two essential elements of any rape case: force (requires resistance, even verbal) and lack of consent. Existing cases have shown overt sexual behavior is implied consent.
> 
> There has never been a successful sexual assault prosecution on "I was groping him, then I froze because he unzipped my pants and he had his way with me while I layed there."


I wonder if this guy is as dangerous in real life as he is on the net or if it's just your typical behind the keyboard tough guy? Although it doesn't really take a "tough guy" in real life to rape a woman, I guess.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> Can someone please post a link to the thread where women are saying that they want men to dominate them in the bedroom?


I don't know how to link to it. One is "Wife finally admitted her attraction to him" in General Discussion. That's far from the first one I've read (not counting D/s threads, which I would regard as just a kink).

You must know that many women feel this way right? I mean, we could discuss percentages but this isn't really a foreign idea to you right?


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> I fully understand that there is a big difference between the two.
> 
> However, when dealing with the general question of what women want, that's two completely different views.
> 
> Is a woman who wants a man to "dominate her in the bedroom" really going to be attracted to a man that goes to great lengths to get "enthusiastic consent" before touching her boob?
> 
> I mean, there's got to be a lot of correlation between "dominant in the bedroom" guys and guys like devil's advocate. Right? There's got to be a lot of correlation between guys like Cletus and I who would never do anything a woman didn't want and failing in the "dominate in the bedroom" category. Right?
> 
> Women always complain about men wanting women to be ****s in the bedroom and angels in the kitchen (or however it goes). Don't men have a reason to complain about women who want them to passively "respect their boundaries" and then dominate them sexually? I understand that you can't have both but, at least, women can be honest enough to pick which one you really want. Women could at least acknowledge that they are a part of the problem. They could stop fvcking devil's advocate all the time and give Cletus some of the action
> 
> Let's try trading one thing women do wrong for each thing men do wrong and then maybe we can all be a little less defensive.


Not all women want to be dominated. Some want to be dominated only part of the time. There might be a small group who wants to be dominated all of the time. 

Men want different things too. 

So find out what that particular woman wants. User words. Talk, get to know her. This is part of the problem with insisting that sex has to happen by the 3rd date. That's not enough time to find out squat about a person. 

A man can absolutely respect a woman's boundaries and be dominate at times. I just don't see how there are exclusive.


----------



## Buddy400

that.girl said:


> Is there an established word for Anon's and my situations? The only one that comes to mind for me is date rape, but even that doesn't quite fit.


Somebody needs to make them up. But there seems to be a big need on the part of some people to purposely lump them all together for some reason.

"Date Rape" was in common usage for a long time. Now it seems to have disappeared. I think that's because some people thought that meant it wasn't "real" rape.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> Let's call a Hamburger a Hamburger and a Hot Dog a Hot Dog.
> 
> The two keep getting lumped into the same category (Fast Food?) and so the conversation goes round and round.
> 
> Why is it so important to use the same term for everything from violent, forcible stranger rape to "unwanted groping"? Does it seem like it trivializes "unwanted groping"? If so, doesn't it also trivialize violent rape?


You will need to talk to the people who do those studies to find out why they use one word for all of that. I too would like to see it broken out.

While one overarching number has meaning.. break it down into some categories, and by age to.

How 
many times have you been groped
How many times have you been raped
How many attempted rapes
How many flashers/masturbators (those creeps that follow women around doing this )
How many dates that forced themselves on you when you said on/froze/etc

The studies do have these categories. but often all we see are the aggregate numbers..


----------



## that.girl

Buddy400 said:


> Somebody needs to make them up. But there seems to be a big need on the part of some people to purposely lump them all together for some reason.
> 
> "Date Rape" was in common usage for a long time. Now it seems to have disappeared. I think that's because some people thought that meant it wasn't "real" rape.


Groping, date rape, and violent rape are all varying degrees of unwanted sexual contact, which is why they're getting lumped together. They're not the same. If i absolutely had to choose, i would rather be groped than raped. So yeah, they're different, and that's causing a lot of confusion in this discussion. 
But they all make a woman uncomfortable, and they are all hard for a man to wrap his head around. That's why they need to be discussed.


----------



## heartsbeating

Buddy400 said:


> I fully understand that there is a big difference between the two.
> 
> However, when dealing with the general question of what women want, that's two completely different views.
> 
> Is a woman who wants a man to "dominate her in the bedroom" really going to be attracted to a man that goes to great lengths to get "enthusiastic consent" before touching her boob?
> 
> I mean, there's got to be a lot of correlation between "dominant in the bedroom" guys and guys like devil's advocate. Right? There's got to be a lot of correlation between guys like Cletus and I who would never do anything a woman didn't want and failing in the "dominate in the bedroom" category. Right?
> 
> Women always complain about men wanting women to be ****s in the bedroom and angels in the kitchen (or however it goes). Don't men have a reason to complain about women who want them to passively "respect their boundaries" and then dominate them sexually? I understand that you can't have both but, at least, women can be honest enough to pick which one you really want. Women could at least acknowledge that they are a part of the problem. They could stop fvcking devil's advocate all the time and give Cletus some of the action
> 
> Let's try trading one thing women do wrong for each thing men do wrong and then maybe we can all be a little less defensive.


This topic is about rape. 

I don't feel the lines should be blurred between non-consensual sex and a sexual preference such as a woman wanting her husband to be more assertive/dominant. That type of sexual play in a healthy manner is still wrapped up with trust, caring, love and respect. 

I hope CoffeeAmore doesn't mind me quoting her from another thread but I feel she was on point:


CoffeeAmore said:


> It's a consensual relationship. It's not slavery or abuse. You don't get to do whatever you want with them. There would be lines in the sand you don't cross depending on the person. That's why some people use safe words or non-verbal gestures to indicate when something is going too far for comfort. And really it's the one who is the sub who controls it if you think about it. It can only go so far as that submissive person is willing.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> Somebody needs to make them up. But there seems to be a big need on the part of some people to purposely lump them all together for some reason.
> 
> "Date Rape" was in common usage for a long time. Now it seems to have disappeared. I think that's because some people thought that meant it wasn't "real" rape.


One thing that makes it confusing is that there are different types of what are called 'date rape'

Date rape means that she knows the guy and is willingly with him. That's where the similarity stops. Not all 'date rape' is some confused thing that happened between two people who are not sure what went on. But when we call something a date rape, it makes it seem less horrible.

A guy I know was walking me home. He raped me. That's considered a date rape. It was an all out rape of the worst kind.

One of our posts talked about her cousin being out with friends, who drugged her, ganged raped her and then threw her on her aunt's lawn in the morning with they were done with her. That's called a date rape. It was even worse that what I went through. But the guys got off Scott free because despite the drugs, despite her injuries, all the guys had to do was to say that it was consensual.

First we need to decide what the categories are, give them names and descriptions.


----------



## heartsbeating

Buddy400 said:


> Let's try trading one thing women do wrong for each thing men do wrong and then maybe we can all be a little less defensive.


I don't feel this is your intention but I don't follow this idea at all, particularly relating to the topic. I've read the experiences of the women in this thread who have been raped or an attempt of violation was made - the women did nothing wrong. They were victims.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> Let's try trading one thing women do wrong for each thing men do wrong and then maybe we can all be a little less defensive.


I'll bite.

*What a guy did wrong:* A guy I knew, my brother's friend, was walking me home at night, he grabbed me by the hair, pulled me into a field and raped me. 

*What I did wrong:* Please tell me what I did wrong.


----------



## JCD

NobodySpecial said:


> Bear in mind the context you may not be aware of is 2 threads indicating that women are responsible for rape.


This is a gross mischaracterization. What was said is that in some cases, actions taken by the woman herself greatly increased her risk...and she did it knowingly.

There is a vast amount of room between 'a woman is 100% responsible for her rape' and 'a woman is totally blameless for what happened to her in all cases.' 

Life is not so nicely black and white.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> I'll bite.
> 
> *What a guy did wrong:* A guy I knew, my brother's friend, was walking me home at night, he grabbed me by the hair, pulled me into a field and raped me.
> 
> *What I did wrong:* Please tell me what I did wrong.


In this case you, of course, did nothing wrong. He did everything wrong. 

In other cases, maybe a woman made a false rape claim.

You don't seriously think that I (or even devil's advocate) would have claimed that you did anything wrong in your situation do you?

Why would you assume that I could even be thinking that?


----------



## Buddy400

heartsbeating said:


> I don't feel this is your intention but I don't follow this idea at all, particularly relating to the topic. I've read the experiences of the women in this thread who have been raped or an attempt of violation was made - the women did nothing wrong. They were victims.


You are correct. That was not my intention.

Thanks for giving an internet stranger the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## GusPolinski

Step #1: "Son, this is what rape is..."

<Mom and Dad proceed to discuss various scenarios that could reasonably be deemed rape. They speak calmly and steadily, all the while encouraging questions and participation throughout the entire course of the conversation.>

Step #2: "Don't do any of these things. EVER."


----------



## that.girl

GusPolinski said:


> Step #1: "Son, this is what rape is..."
> 
> <Mom and Dad proceed to discuss various scenarios that could reasonably be deemed rape. They speak calmly and steadily, all the while encouraging questions and participation throughout the entire course of the conversation.>
> 
> Step #2: "Don't do any of these things. EVER."


And that is how it's done!

Unfortunately, many men on here have stated that they don't need to have this conversation. Most say their sons know not to rape - they probably do. But it sounds like many fail to define rape in detail.


----------



## JCD

NobodySpecial said:


> Do people read the threads?


In my recent experience, no, they don't.


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> In this case you, of course, did nothing wrong. He did everything wrong.
> 
> In other cases, maybe a woman made a false rape claim.
> 
> You don't seriously think that I (or even devil's advocate) would have claimed that you did anything wrong in your situation do you?
> 
> Why would you assume that I could even be thinking that?


When I tried to tell someone to get help, I was told that I must have deserved it or brought it on.


----------



## EleGirl

JCD said:


> This is a gross mischaracterization. What was said is that in some cases, actions taken by the woman herself greatly increased her risk...and she did it knowingly.
> 
> There is a vast amount of room between 'a woman is 100% responsible for her rape' and 'a woman is totally blameless for what happened to her in all cases.'
> 
> Life is not so nicely black and white.



So you are saying that some women are to blame for being raped.


----------



## GusPolinski

EleGirl said:


> So you are saying that some women are to blame for being raped.


:slowly backs away:


----------



## ConanHub

EleGirl said:


> When I tried to tell someone to get help, I was told that I must have deserved it or brought it on.


Jesus Eli! If I was your father or brother, I would have wanted to kill that guy!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## GusPolinski

GusPolinski said:


> Step #1: "Son, this is what rape is..."
> 
> <Mom and Dad proceed to discuss various scenarios that could reasonably be deemed rape. They speak calmly and steadily, all the while encouraging questions and participation throughout the entire course of the conversation.>
> 
> Step #2: "Don't do any of these things. EVER."


And you know what... just for the Hell of it...

Step #1: "Daughter, this is what rape is..."

<Mom and Dad proceed to discuss various scenarios that could reasonably be deemed rape. They speak calmly and steadily, all the while encouraging questions and participation throughout the entire course of the conversation.>

Step #2: "Don't do any of these things. EVER."


----------



## GusPolinski

ConanHub said:


> Jesus Eli! If I was your father or brother, I would have wanted to kill that guy!


Or cousin. Or friend. Or neighbor. Or random guy that she'd never met before.


----------



## ConanHub

GusPolinski said:


> Or cousin. Or friend. Or neighbor. Or random guy that she'd never met before.


Exactly!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JCD

GusPolinski said:


> And you know what... just for the Hell of it...
> 
> Step #1: "Daughter, this is what rape is..."
> 
> <Mom and Dad proceed to discuss various scenarios that could reasonably be deemed rape. They speak calmly and steadily, all the while encouraging questions and participation throughout the entire course of the conversation.>
> 
> Step #2: "Don't do any of these things. EVER."


Step # 3: "And if any of this happens to you, you need to report it immediately to people to help you.

The system WILL fail the victim if the system isn't given the opportunity to work.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> You will need to talk to the people who do those studies to find out why they use one word for all of that. I too would like to see it broken out.


The primary source for the 1 in 5 (or 1 in 4 or 1 in 3) women raped /sexually assaulted in college is

One in five women in college sexually assaulted: the source of this statistic - The Washington Post 

Whether or not a woman was considered assaulted was determined by the study's authors, not the women polled. Apparently any sex while intoxicated was considered assault. 

I've seen this reported in USA Today as 1 in 4 college women raped.

The Washington Post is about as liberal as it gets, more right-leaning sites have many more questions about this study. 

All the categories you are looking for are in these studies, they're just not reported on.


----------



## Buddy400

GusPolinski said:


> :slowly backs away:


Good move. You don't want to be here.


----------



## ConanHub

Take it easy.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## GusPolinski

JCD said:


> Step # 3: "And if any of this happens to you, you need to report it immediately to people to help you.


Duh... should've mentioned that as well. And I'd say the same to a son as well.



JCD said:


> The system WILL fail the victim if the system isn't given the opportunity to work.


Indeed.


----------



## GusPolinski

Buddy400 said:


> The primary source for the 1 in 5 (or 1 in 4 or 1 in 3) women raped /sexually assaulted in college is
> 
> One in five women in college sexually assaulted: the source of this statistic - The Washington Post
> 
> Whether or not a woman was considered assaulted was determined by the study's authors, not the women polled. *Apparently any sex while intoxicated was considered assault. *
> 
> I've seen this reported in USA Today as 1 in 4 college women raped.
> 
> The Washington Post is about as liberal as it gets, more right-leaning sites have many more questions about this study.
> 
> All the categories you are looking for are in these studies, they're just not reported on.


Sooo... would this apply to men as well?


----------



## ConanHub

I agree with reporting but many of us have been let down by the system. It is a very risky gamble. The aftermath is almost worse than the crime.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> Step # 3: "And if any of this happens to you, you need to report it immediately to people to help you.
> 
> The system WILL fail the victim if the system isn't given the opportunity to work.


Unfortunately, the system usually fails the victim. It's getting better, but it has a long way to go. This is a very very difficult crime to prove.


----------



## Anon Pink

ConanHub said:


> I agree with reporting but many of us have been let down by the system. It is a very risky gamble. The aftermath is almost worse than the crime.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


You can say that again!


----------



## that.girl

And in today's world of social media, many young women who report the popular boy are viciously attacked and harassed online. That poor girl in the Steubenville case got it pretty bad. I read one story about a girl who killed herself over the online harassment after she reported a rape. 

I'm not saying it shouldn't be reported, just that people don't always fly to the rescue.


----------



## JCD

ConanHub said:


> I agree with reporting but many of us have been let down by the system. It is a very risky gamble. The aftermath is almost worse than the crime.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


The system won't change if it isn't challenged and shown deficient.


----------



## ConanHub

JCD said:


> The system won't change if it isn't challenged and shown deficient.


Preaching to the choir here brother.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## heartsbeating

JCD said:


> The system won't change if it isn't challenged and shown deficient.


While I agree with the sentiment, what I'm reading in this thread from the experience of the victims, you summed up yourself: 



JCD said:


> Life is not so nicely black and white.



Again, the emphasis seems to be on the system rather than how we treat each other as a society and what can be taught to children.


----------



## that.girl

heartsbeating said:


> Again, the emphasis seems to be on the system rather than how we treat each other as a society and what can be taught to children.


I believe if we teach our children about compassion, responsibility, and consent, they will grow up to run that system, and that society, in a better way.


----------



## JCD

JCD said:


> This is a gross mischaracterization. What was said is that in some cases, actions taken by the woman herself greatly increased her risk...and she did it knowingly.
> 
> There is a vast amount of room between 'a woman is 100% responsible for her rape' and 'a woman is totally blameless for what happened to her in all cases.'
> 
> Life is not so nicely black and white.





EleGirl said:


> So you are saying that some women are to blame for being raped.


At the request of someone I respect, allow me to clarify my statement.

Yesterday, I was in Bangkok for business. Traffic is horrible. One of the only ways to move around easily is to take a 'motorcycle taxi', essentially a guy takes you to where you want to go.

So, to get to my hotel, I got onto the back of a contrivance.

A few notes. Sometimes these guys drink. Sometimes they are hyped up on _ya ba_, a type of methamphetamine. 

THIS guy had a cast on his arm, and it is only now occurring to me now that he might have been on pain killers.

But I was thinking of this thread while I was tooling around on the back of his bike (successfully). "If I get into an accident, I have only myself to blame for being a dumbass."

Did I *deserve* to be in a hypothetical accident? No

Was I to *blame* for being in an accident? No, unless I did something really stupid.

Did I *put* myself into a situation where I had a very high risk for an accident? Yes.

So do I own a share of the responsibility for the situation where I found myself? Yes.

You may disagree. This does not let the responsibility of the driver for causing the accident to occur off the hook. It is an observation.

I think for some (not all) women, they self analyze the situation and say 'how could I have been that stupid!' when they decide not to report, quite aside from any emotional trauma.

I still think they should report. And I still believe that they (and I) should be afforded sympathy for the place they might find themselves.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Unfortunately, the system usually fails the victim. It's getting better, but it has a long way to go. This is a very very difficult crime to prove.


That comes to the nature of the crime, not necessarily always the failure of the system.





heartsbeating said:


> While I agree with the sentiment, what I'm reading in this thread from the experience of the victims, you summed up yourself:
> 
> Again, the emphasis seems to be on the system rather than how we treat each other as a society and what can be taught to children.


As awareness has raised, rapes have gone down 30% in the last 20 years. No one seems to want to make any kind of noise about that fact. 

Reporting has generally gone up.

And you are correct, as we change how society sees the crime, it will make things better. But that emphasis is on 'society'. Not boys. Not girls. Everyone. Girls learn not to be victims and report. Boys learn that consent needs to be a bit more plainly spoken. And girls need to woman up and actually be more direct in their approvals and refusals.


----------



## ConanHub

JCD. I agree with avoiding risk but the situations described in this thread really don't equate to a girl going alone with a bunch of men drinking in an isolated place.

Eli was walking with someone known, Anon and others were on a date with someone trusted, my sisters and I were just kids. Your driver taking you down an alley where his friends are waiting to rob and rape you is a closer example. An even better one would be a trusted family member, friend of the family or work acquaintance suddenly turned on you in a private or isolated area and forced you. Then when you report it, you are belittled and attacked while the authorities sympathize with and support your attacker.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

Buddy400 said:


> The primary source for the 1 in 5 (or 1 in 4 or 1 in 3) women raped /sexually assaulted in college is
> 
> One in five women in college sexually assaulted: the source of this statistic - The Washington Post
> 
> Whether or not a woman was considered assaulted was determined by the study's authors, not the women polled. Apparently any sex while intoxicated was considered assault.
> 
> I've seen this reported in USA Today as 1 in 4 college women raped.
> 
> The Washington Post is about as liberal as it gets, more right-leaning sites have many more questions about this study.
> 
> All the categories you are looking for are in these studies, they're just not reported on.


The article does not report the number correctly.. it's 1 in 4 college girls report sexual assault some time in her lifetime. 
The article is talking about the CDC study. Here is the actually report. The questions asked of the participants are at the end of the report. The women participants answered from their own life's experiences. the people doing the study tallied up the results.


http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf


----------



## EleGirl

GusPolinski said:


> Or cousin. Or friend. Or neighbor. Or random guy that she'd never met before.


Unfortunately that was not my experience.

(I did not tell my father because he was not in town and died before his return home.)


----------



## EleGirl

JCD said:


> The system won't change if it isn't challenged and shown deficient.


What do you think has been going on for decades? It has only improved as little as it has because people have been challenging it loudly.

But we are now told that there is no more to be done and we need to shut up and go home.


----------



## EleGirl

GusPolinski said:


> Or cousin. Or friend. Or neighbor. Or random guy that she'd never met before.


As I said, this is not my experience. Here's another example.

When I was in the Army a man jimmied open the barracks fire door and tried to find an unlocked door. My door was the first one.. I was in bed but it was locked. The next door was unlocked. The visiting sister of one of the other military women was sleeping in that room. She woke up to the guy on her with a knife to her throat. He told her he'd kill her if she made a peep and raped her over for hours. 

The rape was reported. There were a lot of the guys on our base who filed witness reports, complete lies, that they had seen her at the club, drunk , rubbing all over guys. That she had left with the rapist and obviously it was consensual.

It's not true that even most guys will stand up for a woman who is raped. This is often the type of result.

There was other evidence so he was convicted...

He had broken into 3 barracks and done the same thing. 

The woman he raped in my barracks had arrived that night an plane and had not even been in town long enough to do that the 'witnesses' lied about. She had her plane ticket and taxi cab receipts to prove where she had been.

If those two things had not happened, he would have never been prosecuted because men lied for him.


----------



## GusPolinski

EleGirl said:


> As I said, this is not my experience. Here's another example.
> 
> When I was in the Army a man jimmied open the barracks fire door and tried to find an unlocked door. My door was the first one.. I was in bed but it was locked. The next door was unlocked. The visiting sister of one of the other military women was sleeping in that room. She woke up to the guy on her with a knife to her throat. He told her he'd kill her if she made a peep and raped her over for hours.
> 
> The rape was reported. There were a lot of the guys on our base who filed witness reports, complete lies, that they had seen her at the club, drunk , rubbing all over guys. That she had left with the rapist and obviously it was consensual.
> 
> It's not true that even most guys will stand up for a woman who is raped. This is often the type of result.
> 
> There was other evidence so he was convicted...
> 
> He had broken into 3 barracks and done the same thing.
> 
> The woman he raped in my barracks had arrived that night an plane and had not even been in town long enough to do that the 'witnesses' lied about. She had her plane ticket and taxi cab receipts to prove where she had been.
> 
> If those two things had not happened, he would have never been prosecuted because men lied for him.


Damn. Just... damn.

You'd think that they didn't have mothers, sisters, aunts, female cousins, girlfriends, and/or wives themselves.


----------



## ConanHub

All the men who made false statements should have been brought up on charges and discharged.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

GusPolinski said:


> Damn. Just... damn.
> 
> You'd think that they didn't have mothers, sisters, aunts, female cousins, girlfriends, and/or wives themselves.


I saw some of the guys who filed those reports. Some of them were there with their girlfriends. The girl friends were right there with them telling the lies. Women are no innocent in blaming other women.

I was furious. My friends had to pull me away because I was ready to go postal on them.


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> All the men who made false statements should have been brought up on charges and discharged.


As far as I know, nothing ever happened to them. After all witnesses are the most unreliable source of evidence.


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> At the request of someone I respect, allow me to clarify my statement.
> 
> Yesterday, I was in Bangkok for business. Traffic is horrible. One of the only ways to move around easily is to take a 'motorcycle taxi', essentially a guy takes you to where you want to go.
> 
> So, to get to my hotel, I got onto the back of a contrivance.
> 
> A few notes. Sometimes these guys drink. Sometimes they are hyped up on _ya ba_, a type of methamphetamine.
> 
> THIS guy had a cast on his arm, and it is only now occurring to me now that he might have been on pain killers.
> 
> But I was thinking of this thread while I was tooling around on the back of his bike (successfully). "If I get into an accident, I have only myself to blame for being a dumbass."
> 
> Did I *deserve* to be in a hypothetical accident? No
> 
> Was I to *blame* for being in an accident? No, unless I did something really stupid.
> 
> Did I *put* myself into a situation where I had a very high risk for an accident? Yes.
> 
> So do I own a share of the responsibility for the situation where I found myself? Yes.
> 
> You may disagree. This does not let the responsibility of the driver for causing the accident to occur off the hook. It is an observation.
> 
> I think for some (not all) women, they self analyze the situation and say 'how could I have been that stupid!' when they decide not to report, quite aside from any emotional trauma.
> 
> I still think they should report. And I still believe that they (and I) should be afforded sympathy for the place they might find themselves.


The voice of experience indeed. But how did you get this experience? Could you hold yourself as accountable as you did on this trip, had this been one of the first few trips abroad?

Yes, there are times when culpability comes into play, but mostly not.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> The voice of experience indeed. But how did you get this experience? Could you hold yourself as accountable as you did on this trip, had this been one of the first few trips abroad?
> 
> Yes, there are times when culpability comes into play, but mostly not.


Yup. Culpability is not always a factor, or even often a factor. This is not saying it is never ever a factor, which is just as much an absolutist statement as 'a woman is always to blame'.

I tend to be a touch controlling. So when I go to another country, I tend to look up local experts. I read books. I ask questions. 

I, to use an analogy, make sure I go with a pack of experienced girls who can lead me right.

That 'education' thing.


----------



## Anon Pink

Just to set things clearly. Culpability does NOT negate guilt!


----------



## EleGirl

JCD said:


> Yup. Culpability is not always a factor, or even often a factor. This is not saying it is never ever a factor, which is just as much an absolutist statement as 'a woman is always to blame'.
> 
> I tend to be a touch controlling. So when I go to another country, I tend to look up local experts. I read books. I ask questions.
> 
> I, to use an analogy, make sure I go with a pack of experienced girls who can lead me right.
> 
> That 'education' thing.


Everyone... men and women, who have posted on these thread here on TAM has stated many many many many times that women are taught from a young age to take precautions, We take precautions, we teach our children to take precautions.

So what exactly is your point? All you want to talk about are rapes in which a women is either dressed provocatively or has been drinking. These are not even 10% of the rapes that happen. 

All you are trying to do is to blame women who dress provocatively and/or who drink if they get raped. You want them to share the blame with the man because she made do it .. .i guess. Because if she did not make him do it.. she has no blame.


----------



## JCD

EleGirl said:


> What do you think has been going on for decades? It has only improved as little as it has because people have been challenging it loudly.
> 
> But we are now told that there is no more to be done and we need to shut up and go home.


As noted by Anon Pink: it is a very difficult crime to prosecute.

Your last statement is incendiary and probably not particularly accurate.

If I, as a man, get blamed for all rapes, I certainly want some damned credit if we are making things better!

I do not know how much things have improved (besides...you know...this quibbling *30%* that you think is so paltry. I would suggest you think what a 30% pay cut would look like to put it in perspective in size).

I think asking an older female prosecutor or DA would shed some light on how much or how little things have changed.

BUT...one of the points you made requires us to ask 'what is enough'. 'The system' can't get rid off all bad actors or bad actions. We do a good job but if your standard is 'even one rape (or murder or robbery) is too many' than I think that says something more about ridiculous standards than it does about an objective assessment of how well the system is working.

Obviously you are not thinking that, though you said it at least once. Certainly we can make things more satisfying inside the system.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Just to set things clearly. Culpability does NOT negate guilt!


I believe I said that a time or twelve, yes.


----------



## JCD

EleGirl said:


> All you are trying to do is to blame women who dress provocatively and/or who drink if they get raped. You want them to share the blame with the man because she made do it .. .i guess. Because if she did not make him do it.. she has no blame.


I tend to push back at irrational and absolutist statements.

I find the statement 'a woman never ever does anything to merit a rape' to be legally true, but realistically a touch naïve.

I am done with this topic. If you'd like to keep yelling at me about it, please feel free. I am not changing my principle of personal responsibility because you don't like it. It applies to me. I teach it to my children.

"If you do stupid things, bad things are more likely to happen to you." That simple. 

Sorry you don't seem to believe this is true.


----------



## EleGirl

JCD said:


> I tend to push back at irrational and absolutist statements.
> 
> I find the statement *'a woman never ever does anything to merit a rape*' to be legally true, but realistically a touch naïve.


So some women merit (deserve) to be raped? Your words. Not mine.



JCD said:


> I am done with this topic. If you'd like to keep yelling at me about it, please feel free. I am not changing my principle of personal responsibility because you don't like it. It applies to me. It applies to my children.
> 
> If you do stupid things, bad things are more likely to happen to you. That simple.
> 
> Sorry you don't seem to believe this is true.


Bad things (rape) happens more often to women who are not dressed provocatively and who are not drinking.

Most women who dress provocatively and how drink do not get raped while doing these things.

There is something missing in the logic that a women who dresses provocatively and drinks *will* get raped. It's simply not a true statement.


----------



## norajane

> The system' can't get rid off all bad actors or bad actions.


We know. We are well aware of that. That's why we are hoping people will discuss what is and isn't rape with their kids, and what is and isn't sex, how important it is to have clear consent, and to answer their questions about how to handle gray areas so there aren't gray areas.


----------



## ConanHub

JCD, you are certainly being an ass. You are quite off topic and no one is arguing about risky behavior.

This is a very sensitive subject and important. You come across very poorly sir.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JCD

norajane said:


> We know. We are well aware of that. That's why we are hoping people will discuss what is and isn't rape with their kids, and what is and isn't sex, how important it is to have clear consent, and to answer their questions about how to handle gray areas so there aren't gray areas.


Yes. I had that talk with my son about that today. About how important consent is. That consent is considered questionable if a woman is drunk. So he should avoid that situation. 

That will be followed up by the conversation on 'if you make a move and she doesn't like it, back off without a quibble. If she says 'no', stop. Better yet, leave!' 

This is not very hard stuff. It took five minutes.

How do we measure success, however?

He understood the concept pretty darned easily.


----------



## JCD

ConanHub said:


> JCD, you are certainly being an ass. You are quite off topic and no one is arguing about risky behavior.
> 
> This is a very sensitive subject and important. You come across very poorly sir.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I am trying to pass along a bit of nuance to this constant slur that Elegirl throws at me: that I only want to blame the woman.

This is inaccurate and insulting. I am sorry that I an not knuckling under to being slandered. Would you?

If she wants peace, she can drop the subject. I have.


----------



## EleGirl

JCD said:


> I am trying to pass along a bit of nuance to this constant slur that Elegirl throws at me: that I only want to blame the woman.
> 
> *This is inaccurate and insulting. * I am sorry that I an not knuckling under to being slandered. Would you?
> 
> If she wants peace, she can drop the subject. I have.





JCD said:


> I find the statement 'a woman never ever does anything *to merit a rape' * to be legally true, but realistically a touch naïve.


So some women merit (deserve) to be raped? *Your words. Not mine. *

I am only trying to get you to see what you are saying. 

But this is not the topic of this thread. So let's leave it.


----------



## chaos

If your son is a psychopath, then no amount of teaching will stop him from raping women.


----------



## EleGirl

chaos said:


> If your son is a psychopath, then no amount of teaching will stop him from raping women.


But teaching our children what rape is, what consent it, can go a long way to prevent them doing things that cross the line.. .like things that are encouraged by popular culture.


----------



## Personal

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Shall I cite cases? I thought that might be a over the top.
> 
> You ladies are absolutely wrong on this. Participating in a make out session is implied sexual consent. If you don't show any further resistance to his sexual actions, the status quo remains. You're missing two essential elements of any rape case: force (requires resistance, even verbal) and lack of consent. Existing cases have shown overt sexual behavior is implied consent.
> 
> There has never been a successful sexual assault prosecution on "I was groping him, then I froze because he unzipped my pants and he had his way with me while I layed there."


I can't say I agree with you on this.

Since sexual consent can be withdrawn at any time, freezing and or saying no or stop even if it is barely audible come to mind here.

Although a make out session may lead to consensual sex it may also lead to no sex at all.

I've never held the presumption that a woman will have sex with me because she is making out with me. Or that if a woman who is making out with me affords me implied consent to take her sexually whether she desires it or otherwise.

I don't understand why you have suggested (in this discussion) that just saying no, stop with caveats (because she needs to be persuaded) and or freezing is not enough for the withdrawal of consent.

People can change their mind at any time, just because one wants to do something at the time doesn't mean that they will continue to want to do it.

Why does a woman have to resort to violence to stop a man having sex with her if she does not want to or no longer wants to have sex with them?

If I can stop when consent is withdrawn without a woman having to be violent, I don't see why any other man can't stop as well.

I don't understand why you or anyone else would think it's okay to go for it while their supposed sexual partner is frozen while it happens.

Although it was self evident to me without being taught that no, stop and or freezing (except in safety word scenario's) is enough to cease an attempt at sex or to alternatively stop having sex. It is clearly apparent that some don't think this way.



JCD said:


> I am trying to pass along a bit of nuance to this constant slur that Elegirl throws at me: that I only want to blame the woman.
> 
> This is inaccurate and insulting. I am sorry that I an not knuckling under to being slandered. Would you?
> 
> If she wants peace, she can drop the subject. I have.


I don't think you are only blaming the woman at all.

As I read what you write, I think you are holding the man responsible (in the instance of a male raping a woman), and are also likewise arguing that the woman is responsible as well (in the instance of a woman being the victim of rape by a man).

The nuance I read in your arguments is that women bear some responsibility for being raped.

Women are not responsible for their own rape, if they asked for it (literally), it was consensual and it wasn't rape. Rapists choose to rape by starting to have sex without consent and or continuing to have sex despite the withdrawal of that consent.

All of this isn't very ambiguous at all, I consider it morally reprehensible to suggest or imply that consent for sex is implied by making out, or that rape victims are responsible for getting themselves raped.


----------



## heartsbeating

^ I agree. Well said.


----------



## Anon Pink

I can't sleep and its this threads fault!

Quickly browsed back through this thread and it seems we've come to some clarity

Men are confused about consent and how that interferes with being the driving force women expect them to be in matters of sex. Keeping in mind, this thread is about our children, based on our experiences and those of others who have participated, can we all agree that the first time you have sex with someone, consent MUST be clearly given in the affirmative?

I think we can. I think we've also talked about ways to get that consent and not sound like a sexual dud, heaven forbid!

Good job people!


----------



## chaos

EleGirl said:


> But teaching our children what rape is, what consent it, can go a long way to prevent them doing things that cross the line.. .like things that are encouraged by popular culture.


Yes that is needed but it only goes so far. We also need to teach them how detect people with Antisocial personality disorders. If they know who among their circle of friends exhibits the following signs and symptoms, they can improve their chances of not getting involved with them in the first place:

•Disregard for right and wrong 
•Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others 
•Using charm or wit to manipulate others for personal gain or for sheer personal pleasure 
•Intense egocentrism, sense of superiority and exhibitionism 
•Recurring difficulties with the law 
•Repeatedly violating the rights of others by the use of intimidation, dishonesty and misrepresentation 
•Child abuse or neglect 
•Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, impulsiveness, aggression or violence 
•Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others 
•Unnecessary risk-taking or dangerous behaviors 
•Poor or abusive relationships 
•Irresponsible work behavior 
•Failure to learn from the negative consequences of behavior


----------



## RandomDude

Come to think of it what is the point of this thread? I don't have a son but I'm not sure you can actually teach your sons not to rape. You can guide them in basic human principles but in the end it will be their decisions and consequences.


----------



## that.girl

The point of this thread is to decide if, when teaching our boys about rape, we can continue only teaching "no means no," or if it's time to update our playbooks and start giving them more information.


----------



## southbound

jorgegene said:


> My Dad never taught me anything except for by example the way he treated my Mom especially and other women in general. Never once did we have a 'birds and bees' or how to treat women talk. But the way he treated my Mom was more than enough to teach me. And he wasn't a doormat either. .


Same her. My parents didn't "teach me not to rape." Birds and bees were never mentioned, just a good example was set. The thoughts of doing something with a girl against her will never crossed my mind at any time.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

NobodySpecial said:


> Why do you want to tell them to abstain?


Not speaking for anyone else on this thread, only myself...some of us feel this is best for their lives and futures.. the more I read on this forum, it's so obvious the tide has changed so much, we now have bashing for those who feel this way.. 

I am a little offended every time I read someone putting down these views... basically "sex is JUST SEX"....that it's not something valuable enough to wait for someone very very special. 

I don't want my own children to spit in the face of this.. Some of us find it very beautiful, worthy of the wait..


----------



## Shoto1984

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening shoto
> If I dated a woman who struggled and said no - but didn't mean it, that would be our last date ever. Sorry, no one is attractive enough for me to put up with that sort of behavior.
> 
> By the same token I hope that if a woman's date doesn't stop immediately when she says 'no", that would be his last date ever. (and possibly a police report depending on how things went).


Thanks for your thoughts Richard. It was my first (and only) experience with that kind of situation and I was thoroughly confused by the mixed messages. Looking back I have mixed feelings about the situation. On one hand we dated for over a year, she wanted to be submissive and this was her expressing that, she was an amazing lover and I have very fond memories of our time together. On the other, as I stated, she put me in a terrible position. Now, with more life experience I would not take that chance today. I've said nothing of her attractiveness and that did not figure into anything after we had already started dating.


----------



## Shoto1984

ConanHub said:


> Dude. You just overanalyzed it to death. I gained insight into the female world and shared it. They deal with loads of sh!t we do not all the time. I understand that many, if not most, men do not understand this and I do not blame them.
> 
> It is hard to understand unless you really experience it. I think many women do not understand our world as well.


I'm thinking they're your words and if I misunderstood your meaning please clarify.

As for the cross dressing waitress experience, its interesting but I'm not seeing that it gives you any real insight as to what a woman experiences in daily life.


----------



## Shoto1984

It has come to light in this discussion that several of the posting females have been victims of rape, sexual assault or some other offense. My sense is that there is too much emotion carried forward from these events for some to have completely objective discussion on the topic. This is normal and to be expected. Its not unlike asking someone who's just had a child murdered if they believe in the death penalty. The response is understandable but its not how we make and implement policy.


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> Dude. You just overanalyzed it to death. I gained insight into the female world and shared it. They deal with loads of sh!t we do not all the time. I understand that many, if not most, men do not understand this and I do not blame them.
> 
> It is hard to understand unless you really experience it. I think many women do not understand our world as well.


Actually, I think that this experience of yours gives a very clear insight into what women deal with. It was a bit exaggerated because of where you were. But if a good looking woman goes into that same environment, that's very likely the experience she will have.

One of my nephews dressed as a woman for Halloween when he was a senior in high school. He went around town dressed like that. He made a very pretty woman at that age. By the end of the evening he was extremely upset about how he had been treated and the liberties men took in coming on to him, etc.

I have been trying to find online an old interview of Dustin Hoffman in which he discusses how he prepared for the role of Tootsie. It's one where he says that before the filming he spent a fair amount of time just going around to different places in town dressed as Tootsie.. the way he was treated very differently, the way he was treated especially by men. He said that I opened his eyes to how differently women are treated; and that difference was not good.


----------



## Shoto1984

Seriously? There are so many problems with this its hard to know where to start. This could go for pages but I'll just say that a study where you have A and B and you introduce C which is kind of like A but not quite and B likely knows this at some conscious or unconscious level (unmeasurable, maybe observable and maybe not) and you compare B's behavior with A and C and find similarities and draw correlation is just........crazy.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
This started as "how to teach your sons not to rape", but maybe another goal is to discuss "consent" with your children. It may be as, or more important to teach that as it is to teach about the mechanics of sex.

Sometimes consent is simple: a "yes, please do X", or a "no, stop" are very clear. Other times though it is quite complex. Its recognizing the difference between someone who is lying still and enjoying what is happening, and someone who is frozen in terror. it is the difference between playful struggling and real resistance. It is the difference between playful erotic spanking and real abuse. It is the difference between tipsy, and incapacitated.

It depends a lot on history. I can walk up behind my wife, grab her bottom and gently bite her earlobe because I know she consents to that based on previous experience. If I did that to a stranger it would be assault.

Its complicated because many people want sex to be spontaneous and surprising. They don't want to say "please touch but don't penetrate my anus with your finger". They want a partner who can figure out what they want from more subtle non-verbal clues.


Some rapists simply don't care about consent. This sort of discussion wont affect them. Others though commit rape by greatly stretching the definition of consent - "well she didn't fight back very hard, so it wasn't rape". It might be possible to change their behavior. It also might be possible to teach girls how to give clear signals without completely destroying the fun of spontaneous sex. 

One key I think is escalating actions and signals. Acceptance of one "level" of intimacy can be accepted as allowing a slight increase if no other signals are given, but not suddenly doing something new and much more sexual. Then if something happens that you don't want, you can start with a very mild signal of non-consent, but escalate that to a clear, loud "no" and then what ever physical resistance seems appropriate to the situation.

People need to learn to recognize the difference between misinterpreting signals and willfully ignoring them.


----------



## JCD

Consider this: we are asking our sons (and ourselves) to interpret signals and I am not always sure that some women are fully clear in their own mind what kind of signals they want to give or even did give. 

There ARE diffident women out there (just as there are diffident men). So No means no, but no means 'communication' not 'I flicked my eyes in a negative way. Why didn't he understand?"

This applies ONLY to POV rapes. Generally a guy grabbing a girls hair and dragging her to a nearby cornfield is not exactly receptive to communication. However POV rapes DO happen.

I like the escalation of signals idea.

I like the 'try once and done' idea. If a boy is trying to escalate, and even as obvious a gesture such as removing your hand from a specific place means 'don't try that again.'

BUT...girls, I don't mind teaching this to my son. Really don't. The current political atmosphere is TOXIC to boys. It is for his safety. But one of the other things I'm going to teach him is this bit of communication "If you say no to something, you better damned well be willing to tell me yes if you change your mind because it is never happening again without your say so."

So ladies, 'Coy' has left the building. So has 'Subtle' and 'Teasing'. As Anon Pink said on another thread "You need to own your sexuality." Hair flicks and touching the arm just doesn't cut it anymore.


----------



## Cletus

Several women here are advocating for a shift away from "no means no" to teaching boys how to ask for and receive permission even in the event that permission is given non-verbally. I can't argue that this wouldn't overall be an improvement, as it _probably_ wouldn't hurt.

What I'm not comfortable with in this discussion is the shift away from the only unambiguous and guaranteed no-fail solution (excepting truly criminal behavior), which is for someone to say "no".

Teaching boys to be more sensitive will allow more girls to never have to say "no", since their uber-sensitive boyfriend will have asked or already figured it out, and that's a good thing, but on the off chance that a man fails to understand a woman's intent or body language (I know, who thinks these things up, right?), we can never back away from teaching girls to be vocal about their limits. 

Teaching boys to be more observant, polite, and engaged is a good thing as an adjunct to "no means no" training. It can never be a surrogate.


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> Consider this: we are asking our sons (and ourselves) to interpret signals and I am not always sure that some women are fully clear in their own mind what kind of signals they want to give or even did give.
> 
> There ARE diffident women out there (just as there are diffident men). So No means no, but no means 'communication' not 'I flicked my eyes in a negative way. Why didn't he understand?"
> 
> This applies ONLY to POV rapes. Generally a guy grabbing a girls hair and dragging her to a nearby cornfield is not exactly receptive to communication. However POV rapes DO happen.
> 
> I like the escalation of signals idea.
> 
> I like the 'try once and done' idea. If a boy is trying to escalate, and even as obvious a gesture such as removing your hand from a specific place means 'don't try that again.'
> 
> BUT...girls, I don't mind teaching this to my son. Really don't. The current political atmosphere is TOXIC to boys. It is for his safety. But one of the other things I'm going to teach him is this bit of communication "If you say no to something, you better damned well be willing to tell me yes if you change your mind because it is never happening again without your say so."
> 
> So ladies, 'Coy' has left the building. So has 'Subtle' and 'Teasing'. As Anon Pink said on another thread "You need to own your sexuality." Hair flicks and touching the arm just doesn't cut it anymore.


That's exactly what I hoped this thread might bring about...from fathers of sons and mothers of sons.

Coy has left the building, whether you're 14, 24, or 54. Women have to own it if they want it and men have to insist on that ownership.


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> Several women here are advocating for a shift away from "no means no" to teaching boys how to ask for and receive permission even in the event that permission is given non-verbally. I can't argue that this wouldn't overall be an improvement, as it _probably_ wouldn't hurt.
> 
> *What I'm not comfortable with in this discussion is the shift away from the only unambiguous and guaranteed no-fail solution (excepting truly criminal behavior), which is for someone to say "no".*
> 
> *Teaching boys to be more sensitive will allow more girls to never have to say "no", since their uber-sensitive boyfriend will have asked or already figured it out, and that's a good thing, but on the off chance that a man fails to understand a woman's intent or body language (I know, who thinks these things up, right?), we can never back away from teaching girls to be vocal about their limits.
> *
> Teaching boys to be more observant, polite, and engaged is a good thing as an adjunct to "no means no" training. It can never be a surrogate.


Cletus, I think you may have a missed a point or two.

No we're not advocating that boy or men become mind readers At ALL!!! We are advocating that sons be taught to seek consent instead of acquiescence. Even if it seems like she is into it. Moving forward with intimate touching needs to be consentual. And the only way for young people to KNOW it is Consentual is when the ask and speak.


----------



## norajane

Cletus said:


> Several women here are advocating for a shift away from "no means no" to teaching boys how to ask for and receive permission even in the event that permission is given non-verbally. I can't argue that this wouldn't overall be an improvement, as it _probably_ wouldn't hurt.
> 
> What I'm not comfortable with in this discussion is the shift away from the only unambiguous and guaranteed no-fail solution (excepting truly criminal behavior), which is for someone to say "no".
> 
> Teaching boys to be more sensitive will allow more girls to never have to say "no", since their uber-sensitive boyfriend will have asked or already figured it out, and that's a good thing, but on the off chance that a man fails to understand a woman's intent or body language (I know, who thinks these things up, right?), we can never back away from teaching girls to be vocal about their limits.
> 
> Teaching boys to be more observant, polite, and engaged is a good thing as an adjunct to "no means no" training. It can never be a surrogate.


Cletus, it seems that some people think they should keep pushing if a girl says no. Some people do absolutely stop when a girl says no, but some do not. We've seen ample evidence of that in this thread, as you know. Just saying no doesn't seem enough, so let's try teaching kids that only Yes means keep going.

Of course we aren't going to stop teaching that if a girl says no, you have to stop. But for those for whom a girl saying no simply means try harder and keep going, maybe learning that they need to hear a yes would make things more clear. 

I don't see how teaching that they need a yes in order to keep going is hurtful to anyone.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Cletus, I think you may have a missed a point or two.
> 
> No we're not advocating that boy or men become mind readers At ALL!!! We are advocating that sons be taught to seek consent instead of acquiescence. Even if it seems like she is into it. Moving forward with intimate touching needs to be consentual. And the only way for young people to KNOW it is Consentual is when the ask and speak.


Yes and:

I am reminded of a phrase by a conservative speaker on gay marriage: "Go ahead and give it to them. They won't like it."

I think, in the same way, not all women will be delighted in having to own their sexuality. 

And it has pretty much been, in my experience, that women do assume that men have Kreskin like abilities and are offended when he does not know which egregious sin he has recently commited.

This is in the 'teaching kids about communication' lesson: if someone seems evil or stupid to you, you probably don't understand where they are coming from. And the fault can lie on either side.


----------



## Anon Pink

SimplyAmorous said:


> Not speaking for anyone else on this thread, only myself...some of us feel this is best for their lives and futures.. the more I read on this forum, it's so obvious the tide has changed so much, we now have bashing for those who feel this way..
> 
> I am a little offended every time I read someone putting down these views... basically "sex is JUST SEX"....that it's not something valuable enough to wait for someone very very special.
> 
> I don't want my own children to spit in the face of this.. Some of us find it very beautiful, worthy of the wait..


Totally off topic SA but as one of the people here who DONT advocate for abstaining before marriage I want you to know I do not look down on you. But I think you and your husband simply won the lottery. The beautiful way in which your marriage has thrived is so atypical that I personally think it is short sighted to teach your kids to also expect to hit the lottery.

However, knowing you, I know you have covered the topics involving romance and sex with your kids in clear and empowering terms and THAT is almost always missing in other abstaining messages.

I would be totally on board with abstaining messages IF they also covered embracing sexuality, embracing sexual thoughts and feelings, embracing the language of sex, but 99% of the time they don't. The enforce the message with shame and guilt which makes developing a healthy sexual self take a LONG damn time if it's even attempted.

So go on with your bad self about abstaining, but also advocate for healthy understanding and embracing of developing sexuality in ALL its forms. Kay hon?


----------



## JCD

norajane said:


> Cletus, it seems that some people think they should keep pushing if a girl says no. Some people do absolutely stop when a girl says no, but some do not. We've seen ample evidence of that in this thread, as you know. Just saying no doesn't seem enough, so let's try teaching kids that only Yes means keep going.
> 
> Of course we aren't going to stop teaching that if a girl says no, you have to stop. But for those for whom a girl saying no simply means try harder and keep going, maybe learning that they need to hear a yes would make things more clear.
> 
> I don't see how teaching that they need a yes in order to keep going is hurtful to anyone.


Here is the weak point in that chain of logic: sometimes, even in a matter of minutes, women can and do change their mind...and they do not exactly give off a signal when this happens. They sometimes believe in 'moments' where someone is 'just supposed to know'. (I blame too many romantic movies) So guys are left puzzled and as the relationship continues apace, try and try again (I do not advocate going any more aggressive than a kiss, myself. Then again, I am older and if they aren't up for more at close to my time frame, I am probably jettisoning the relationship pretty soon. She obviously is not feeling as strongly about me as I am about her)

So if you are going down that road, time to teach the little girls to be more direct.

I have noted that my girls tend to be much more modest and less 'aggressive' in how they present themselves on some subjects...not sure if it is a general gender thing.

How many of you women in your teen and twenties reached out and kissed a guy first?


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> Yes and:
> 
> I am reminded of a phrase by a conservative speaker on gay marriage: "Go ahead and give it to them. They won't like it."
> 
> I think, in the same way, not all women will be delighted in having to own their sexuality.
> 
> And it has pretty much been, in my experience, that women do assume that men have Kreskin like abilities and are offended when he does not know which egregious sin he has recently commited.
> 
> This is in the 'teaching kids about communication' lesson: if someone seems evil or stupid to you, you probably don't understand where they are coming from. And the fault can lie on either side.


Yes, but...

Those women who will take offense at having to own their sexuality are clearly women who might not make good partners. 

Soooo, you're welcome!


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> Here is the weak point in that chain of logic: sometimes, even in a matter of minutes, women can and do change their mind...and they do not exactly give off a signal when this happens. They sometimes believe in 'moments' where someone is 'just supposed to know'. (I blame too many romantic movies)
> 
> So if you are going down that road, time to teach the little girls to be more direct.
> 
> I have noted that my girls tend to be much more modest and less 'aggressive' in how they present themselves on some subjects...not sure if it is a general gender thing.
> 
> How many of you women in your teen and twenties reached out and kissed a guy first?


Never, but I was a mess.

I know my middle daughter was the sexual aggressor in her first real relationship when she was in 9th grade... However she's now 25 and that boy has come out of the closet... Sooo there's that.


----------



## Cletus

norajane said:


> I don't see how teaching that they need a yes in order to keep going is hurtful to anyone.


Do you honestly think that the boys who won't take no for an answer are the same boys who will actively seek permission?

I find this to be naive at a profound level.


----------



## Cletus

Anon Pink said:


> Cletus, I think you may have a missed a point or two.


I have not missed this point. I do not agree with it as the best means to an end. 

The implicit assumption that I have been consistently pointing out here is that this places the burden of knowing what permission is required and when it is required on the person whose boundary is not being tested. Even with the best intentioned partner, this is a system which has inherent failure built into it from the core if not vigorously backed up with a failsafe "no". 

I'm an engineer. We don't like building an obvious failure point into a system from the start. I can't help you with the boys who won't listen to "no", but they're not the boys who are going to be asking for permission either. 

And to be very clear, I think this kind of training is a good thing that should be in addition to other less ambiguous means.
[/QUOTE]


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Yes, but...
> 
> Those women who will take offense at having to own their sexuality are clearly women who might not make good partners.
> 
> Soooo, you're welcome!


Do you think that MOST women are willing to own their sexuality without a struggle?

And if most women are not, what does that mean about the number of 'good partners' among women?


----------



## JCD

Cletus said:


> Do you honestly think that the boys who won't take no for an answer are the same boys who will actively seek permission?
> 
> I find this to be naive at a profound level.


It is all over our media. The lesson boys are taught is to push and push and push to get the girl. Don't take the rejection. Make her change her mind. Try this...then try that...then try the other thing as she makes you dance attendance.

Now, all of that is going into the rubbish bin.

This...is problematic.


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> I have not missed this point. I do not agree with it as the best means to an end.
> 
> The implicit assumption that I have been consistently pointing out here is that this places the *burden of knowing what permission is required and when it is required on the person whose boundary is not being tested. *Even with the best intentioned partner, this is a system which has inherent failure built into it from the core if not vigorously backed up with a failsafe "no".
> 
> I'm an engineer. We don't like building an obvious failure point into a system from the start. I can't help you with the boys who won't listen to "no", but they're not the boys who are going to be asking for permission either.
> 
> And to be very clear, I think this kind of training is a good thing that should be in addition to other less ambiguous means.



As usual Cletus you make a very salient point about who owns the burden of gaining consent when the action is inherently fraught with ambiguities.

While it seems obvious to me, that the person who is doing the action of crossing a line and escalating physical intimacy is the same person who needs to seek consent, I can understand how that burden might feel unfair.

I don't have an answer. But I think talking about this might help us all come to a better understanding of the problem of consent which will lead to answers. 






JCD said:


> Do you think that MOST women are willing to own their sexuality without a struggle?
> 
> And if most women are not, what does that mean about the number of 'good partners' among women?


No, I don't. But this is the way it SHOULD be. 

LOL, I think it means a lot of men are settling for good enough!


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> It is all over our media. The lesson boys are taught is to push and push and push to get the girl. Don't take the rejection. Make her change her mind. Try this...then try that...then try the other thing as she makes you dance attendance.
> 
> Now, all of that is going into the rubbish bin.
> 
> This...is problematic.


No I don't think so.

I'm not suggesting that boys be taught to be passive about girls. I'm suggesting they continue to be the sexual driver that girls expect them to be. I'm asking them to also drive ownership.

"Baby, I need to know you want this..." Maybe it's just me but I think that's hot!


----------



## Shoto1984

JCD said:


> It is all over our media. The lesson boys are taught is to push and push and push to get the girl. Don't take the rejection. Make her change her mind. Try this...then try that...then try the other thing as she makes you dance attendance.
> 
> Now, all of that is going into the rubbish bin.
> 
> This...is problematic.


Careful... you're on thin ice here lol We all (women included) need to work to change the culture if that is what we want. When the music award shows are on and the women singers are on stage grinding in body suits there needs to be outrage and boycotts. When Victoria Secret launches their new campaign featuring very young women wearing next to nothing with that Come-F**k-Me look on their face there needs to be demonstrations. You can't keep feeding the masses hyper sexualizing messages and expect it to have no effect.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

My last post in this thread, as I think things have run their course, and I'm spending too much time on it. (damn forum addictions)




Ikaika said:


> So posting a legal definition doesn't change anything? Ok, I don't agree, but we are free to express our opinions.
> 
> I'm not sure how one defines implied consent based on your first quote (listed above) , but again I simply don't agree, but we are free to express our opinions.


It doesn't change anything. The definition of consent is consistent with implied or express consent. The law accepts both as consent.

That someone just lays there is no change to the status quo where consent has already been implied by her participation. I understand you don't like that, but that's really how it is.

If you'd like to change state laws to explicitly require express consent before penetration, well that's another thing entirely. By such a definition, you'd basically be saying most sex had today is rape. In transition from foreplay to intercourse, how many people stop and ask?

I regularly have sex that doesn't involve her doing much of anything - it's called doggy style. Should we stop and explicitly ask for consent each time she stops moving? Most women are pretty still during oral sex and finger play as well. Should consent be asked for in each advance higher on the scale of intimacy? Can I kiss you? Can I touch your breast? Can I put it in? I don't know about you, but my intimate life certainly doesn't look like that. It is because of all that ambiguity that the burden lies with women to say no. 

A fair minded person recognizes progression from one thing to another as fluid and most often unspoken. Consent for the new advance being implied by participation in the last.

Another common scenario is a married couple that just crawled into bed and is spooning. She's is awake, but doesn't move. He decides to rub up on her and transition to spooning sex. She doesn't move. Is this rape? With no other factors, it's not. Consent is implied by the marriage relationship, and there is no withdrawal of consent or resistance. He has no reason to believe he is unwelcomed. Plenty of sleepy married sex relies on implied consent. 

You're simply not going to get a conviction of rape where consent is implied, and she puts up no resistance.

It's not even uncommon to hear from women that they weren't in the mood for it, until he started doing it. That's something that ceases to exist without implied consent that she doesn't actually oppose his attempt.

We cannot be vague about rape. It must be consistent. *Either we demand that express consent always required, or the burden lies with women to say no, because men can't read women's minds and there are many circumstances where a woman chooses to just lie back and relax, and many circumstances where consent is implied.*

Freezing up is unfortunate, tragic even... but no failing or abuse of his. Given no change in status quo, it's simply not enough information for him to know that you mean for him to stop. Most of the times I've gone down on a woman for example, they are quiet and still at first. Am I to believe they've withdrawn consent? Of course not.

Saying no is the simplest of solutions. It has no ambiguity. If you're not confident enough, or comfortable enough with someone to say no, and maintain your boundaries, you really shouldn't be engaging in any sexual activity.

You were all about it, then you weren't, but you didn't tell him that. If we're on a first date and I move in for a first kiss at the end of the night - even only a peck - and she doesn't pull away, it's only reasonable to judge that she consented to the kiss. We don't ask if we may kiss, and most women don't want to hear him ask. So it goes along the entire sexual scale, and this is recognized by the legal system. Someone jumps out and initiates/escalates to the next step of intimacy based on perception of comfort with the last without asking. If we want that to exist, and I think most do, then we must have a concept of implied consent.

If you want men to explicitly ask for express consent immediately prior to intercourse, well that's fine... change the law. But regardless, one will still have to say no or resist to withdraw that consent after it is given - so freezing up is still an issue! Shall we define stillness as withdrawal of consent? Imagine you lie still for a moment enjoying what you're feeling, so we stop. That's gonna be hilarious given that a significant percentage of women just lay still concentrating their own feeling for at least a portion of a sexual encounter in order to orgasm.

This to me is just offloading responsibility for herself to the man. Are you ok? Are you ok? If she's not, SHE should just speak up and say so.


----------



## that.girl

These rules are intended not so much for marriage (which is a level of implied consent in itself), but for new partners, with whom you are not familiar. You know your wife's signals. 
If i was on a first date and kissed a guy, and he did not kiss me back, i wouldn't continue. I would stop and see what the problem was.
These rules are intended to help inexperienced young people find and communicate their boundaries, which is probably a new situation for them.


----------



## chaos

Cletus said:


> Do you honestly think that the boys who won't take no for an answer are the same boys who will actively seek permission?
> 
> I find this to be naive at a profound level.


:iagree:

A study published in 2002 by David Lisak and Paul Miller titled Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists reveals some interesting results. But if you don't want to read the entire study, then read this excerpt from Amanda Marcotte's Salon magazine article titled Rape Victims Are Common Rapists Are Not



Amanda Marcotte said:


> Let's be clear: No one is saying that the high rates of victimization among college women mean that all men are rapists. *That 1 in 5 college women have been assaulted doesn't mean that 1 in 5 men are assailants. Far from it*. A study published in 2002 by David Lisak and Paul Miller, for which they interviewed college men about their sexual histories, found that only about 6 percent of the men surveyed had attempted or successfully raped someone. While some of them only tried once, most of the rapists were repeat offenders, with each committing an average of 5.8 rapes apiece. *The 6 percent of men who were rapists were generally violent men, as well. "The 120 rapists were responsible for 1,225 separate acts of interpersonal violence, including rape, battery, and child physical and sexual abuse," the researchers write. A single rapist can leave a wake of victims, racking up the numbers rapidly, as the victim surveys are clearly showing. *
> 
> This cannot be emphasized enough: The high rates of campus sexual assault are due mostly to a small percentage of men who assault multiple women. Understanding this makes the problem of sexual assault on campus much less overwhelming and, hopefully, easier to accept and address. Women aren't running a gauntlet of would-be rapists when they go to a party or go out on dates. *Most men they encounter are perfectly safe. This issue isn't about demonizing men as a group or scaring women into thinking men are inherently dangerous. The issue here is about eradicating the small group of predators on campuses that are continually getting away with their crimes.*


----------



## Anon Pink

That's a good post Chaos.

Just to fine tune a point, we're not specifically targeting men who won't take no for an answer, we are attempting to include all incidences in which a female feels forced.


And I can hear you rolling your eyes Buster!


----------



## Healer

southbound said:


> Same her. My parents didn't "teach me not to rape." Birds and bees were never mentioned, just a good example was set. The thoughts of doing something with a girl against her will never crossed my mind at any time.


Exactly. It's either in your nature or it's not. I can't think of a bigger turn off than trying to force myself on someone. It takes one sick **** to be able to get hard while he's trying to force someone to have sex against their will. How the **** does that even work? I'll never understand that.


----------



## Buddy400

norajane said:


> Cletus, it seems that some people think they should keep pushing if a girl says no. Some people do absolutely stop when a girl says no, but some do not. We've seen ample evidence of that in this thread, as you know. Just saying no doesn't seem enough, so let's try teaching kids that only Yes means keep going..


That's why these conversations never go anywhere.

No man here has suggested that if a girl says no, the man should just keep pushing. Even DvlsAdv8, the most aggressive man here, says that no means "stop what you're doing". He just thinks it's okay to try again later to see if he still gets a no. He never said that he was going to go right past "No". Every other man on this thread has said that they would, and have, stopped at "no". So who are these men that say "don't stop at no"? A couple of manosphere a$$hats?

If some guys are willing to blow right past no, do you really think they're going to bother trying to get affirmative consent?

And, yes, women are asking us to read their minds. I've seen plenty of comments on this thread where non-verbal clues such as "freezing up", "backing away" and "obviously not being into it" are expected to be read accurately by guys.

Say "No" or make me have a signed contract first. I don't care. I'll play by whatever rules you come up with. Just make sure they are clear and unambiguous.

It* does *seem to me as if women are having a problem owning their own sexuality and men are being asked to solve the problem for them.


----------



## Buddy400

Healer said:


> It takes one sick **** to be able to get hard while he's trying to force someone to have sex against their will. How the **** does that even work? I'll never understand that.


Me neither. I couldn't get an erection even play acting a rape scenario.

Yet, there are a lot of women out there that would think I'm not sexually attractive if I couldn't do it.


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> My last post in this thread, as I think things have run their course, and I'm spending too much time on it. (damn forum addictions)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't change anything. The definition of consent is consistent with implied or express consent. The law accepts both as consent.
> 
> 
> 
> That someone just lays there is no change to the status quo where consent has already been implied by her participation. I understand you don't like that, but that's really how it is.
> 
> 
> 
> If you'd like to change state laws to explicitly require express consent before penetration, well that's another thing entirely. By such a definition, you'd basically be saying most sex had today is rape. In transition from foreplay to intercourse, how many people stop and ask?
> 
> 
> 
> I regularly have sex that doesn't involve her doing much of anything - it's called doggy style. Should we stop and explicitly ask for consent each time she stops moving? Most women are pretty still during oral sex and finger play as well. Should consent be asked for in each advance higher on the scale of intimacy? Can I kiss you? Can I touch your breast? Can I put it in? I don't know about you, but my intimate life certainly doesn't look like that. It is because of all that ambiguity that the burden lies with women to say no.
> 
> 
> 
> A fair minded person recognizes progression from one thing to another as fluid and most often unspoken. Consent for the new advance being implied by participation in the last.
> 
> 
> 
> Another common scenario is a married couple that just crawled into bed and is spooning. She's is awake, but doesn't move. He decides to rub up on her and transition to spooning sex. She doesn't move. Is this rape? With no other factors, it's not. Consent is implied by the marriage relationship, and there is no withdrawal of consent or resistance. He has no reason to believe he is unwelcomed. Plenty of sleepy married sex relies on implied consent.
> 
> 
> 
> You're simply not going to get a conviction of rape where consent is implied, and she puts up no resistance.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not even uncommon to hear from women that they weren't in the mood for it, until he started doing it. That's something that ceases to exist without implied consent that she doesn't actually oppose his attempt.
> 
> 
> 
> We cannot be vague about rape. It must be consistent. *Either we demand that express consent always required, or the burden lies with women to say no, because men can't read women's minds and there are many circumstances where a woman chooses to just lie back and relax, and many circumstances where consent is implied.*
> 
> 
> 
> Freezing up is unfortunate, tragic even... but no failing or abuse of his. Given no change in status quo, it's simply not enough information for him to know that you mean for him to stop. Most of the times I've gone down on a woman for example, they are quiet and still at first. Am I to believe they've withdrawn consent? Of course not.
> 
> 
> 
> Saying no is the simplest of solutions. It has no ambiguity. If you're not confident enough, or comfortable enough with someone to say no, and maintain your boundaries, you really shouldn't be engaging in any sexual activity.
> 
> 
> 
> You were all about it, then you weren't, but you didn't tell him that. If we're on a first date and I move in for a first kiss at the end of the night - even only a peck - and she doesn't pull away, it's only reasonable to judge that she consented to the kiss. We don't ask if we may kiss, and most women don't want to hear him ask. So it goes along the entire sexual scale, and this is recognized by the legal system. Someone jumps out and initiates/escalates to the next step of intimacy based on perception of comfort with the last without asking. If we want that to exist, and I think most do, then we must have a concept of implied consent.
> 
> 
> 
> If you want men to explicitly ask for express consent immediately prior to intercourse, well that's fine... change the law. But regardless, one will still have to say no or resist to withdraw that consent after it is given - so freezing up is still an issue! Shall we define stillness as withdrawal of consent? Imagine you lie still for a moment enjoying what you're feeling, so we stop. That's gonna be hilarious given that a significant percentage of women just lay still concentrating their own feeling for at least a portion of a sexual encounter in order to orgasm.
> 
> 
> 
> This to me is just offloading responsibility for herself to the man. Are you ok? Are you ok? If she's not, SHE should just speak up and say so.



But you went not from making out to sexual consent. And that is what confused me. How do you go from we are making out to "it is implied then she wants sex with me"? That was my confusion about your initial statement which I quoted twice. So, I am not understanding how the above diatribe fits into that narrow scenario. I will be the first to admit, this is a tough crime convict on based both on what will always be both state of mind and he said she said. But, to state of mind: "does making out, automatically imply consent to sex?"

So, to Anon's question what should we be teaching our sons about what consent should mean?


----------



## Buddy400

Anon Pink said:


> we are attempting to include all incidences in which a female feels forced.


But how are men supposed to know that a female feels forced?

We can *guess* that a female feels forced.

The female *knows* that she feels forced.

So, why is it up to the person that can only guess to act?

Why not the person who actually knows how she feels?

Sorry. But it's up to women to say "I'm feeling forced". It can't be solved by having guy's guess how you feel and avoid putting women in this position.

BTW, Anon, it's a pleasure to talk with you. You really do seem to be trying to understand the other point of view.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

that.girl said:


> These rules are intended not so much for marriage (which is a level of implied consent in itself), but for new partners, with whom you are not familiar. You know your wife's signals.
> If i was on a first date and kissed a guy, and he did not kiss me back, i wouldn't continue. I would stop and see what the problem was.
> These rules are intended to help inexperienced young people find and communicate their boundaries, which is probably a new situation for them.


Yes, but do you see that you're already in violation by kissing without consent, if we remove the concept of implied consent? You got the kiss.

Replace kissing with penetration. He inserts, and she becomes catatonic - doesn't withdraw, but doesn't participate. Without the concept of implied consent, he's a rapist now regardless of whether he recognizes something wrong or not. It basically means no one can initiate without explicitly asking.

Whether implied by the marriage relationship, or by the make out session... it's all implied consent, and a consistent understanding.

Requiring him to make sure you're not freezing up makes him your keeper. While romantically ideal and chivalrous, he has no duty to uphold your boundaries for you. I totally get why this appeals to so many of you. But really, its a statement that you can't take care of yourselves, so we need to take care of you for you.

I'll take flak as usual I'm sure, but that's not an equally capable agent, that's an inferior. That's a child who can't be relied upon to take care of herself. I reject that women are incapable of standing up for themselves and that men have a duty to do it for them. I don't believe in treating women as children. If a girl can't take such responsibility, then she shouldn't be engaging in any sexual activity.

Teach that to girls. Don't tell boys that they have to manage her boundaries for her. They are hers, and her responsibility alone.

She's an agent, or she's not. If she can't be trusted to take care of herself, she's not an agent.

(last post... really. lol I have work to do!! Need to join forum addicts anonymous).


----------



## Buddy400

FrenchFry said:


> I guess if you can't tell if a woman is into it, stop and ask questions. Things I'll teach my son.


But, what if I think she's into it and I'm wrong?



FrenchFry said:


> We'll do our part, okay?


That's an attitude that I appreciate. I'm guessing that it isn't intended, but a lot of these discussions are perceived by men as being all about what guys do wrong.


----------



## Anon Pink

Buddy400 said:


> But how are men supposed to know that a female feels forced?
> 
> We can *guess* that a female feels forced.
> 
> The female *knows* that she feels forced.
> 
> So, why is it up to the person that can only guess to act?
> 
> Why not the person who actually knows how she feels?
> 
> Sorry. But it's up to women to say "I'm feeling forced". It can't be solved by having guy's guess how you feel and avoid putting women in this position.
> 
> BTW, Anon, it's a pleasure to talk with you. You really do seem to be trying to understand the other point of view.


Well thank you buddy, that was a very nice thing to say and I appreciate it. Because it is very hard to discuss things such as this without huge disconnects in meaning and considering the history of some women participating, not to mention how men might feel they're being branded unfairly...it's hard to keep things civil.

"*The female knows that she feels forced.

So, why is it up to the person that can only guess to act?*"

Okay. Ask yourself what is happening that makes her feel forced? Is SHE doing something or is HE doing something? Who is doing the something that is causing the feeling?


----------



## Buddy400

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Requiring him to make sure you're not freezing up makes him your keeper. While romantically ideal and chivalrous, he has no duty to uphold your boundaries for you. I totally get why this appeals to so many of you. But really, its a statement that you can't take care of yourselves, so we need to take care of you for you.
> 
> I'll take flak as usual I'm sure, but that's not an equally capable agent, that's an inferior. That's a child who can't be relied upon to take care of herself. I reject that women are incapable of standing up for themselves and that men have a duty to do it for them. I don't believe in treating women as children. If a girl can't take such responsibility, then she shouldn't be engaging in any sexual activity.


:iagree::iagree::iagree:

It's put more boldly than I'm comfortable with, but that's *it*.

I don't want to treat women like they are inferior. I want to treat them as my equal.


----------



## Jung_admirer

Suitor: Well, see, the dance goes to midnight. So, why don't I bring her back around 1AM ?

Mr. Miyagi: What you do for extra hour?

Suitor: Well--

Mr. Miyagi: Treat her with respect.


----------



## Anon Pink

Buddy400 said:


> But, what if I think she's into it and I'm wrong?


Excellent fabulous question! Right to the heart of the matter. Because only experience will teach you the difference between I think she was into it and she WAS as into it. 

How do you KNOW she was into it? Experiencing the afterglow and contented bodies? Even that might be too vague particularly among young women. Talking about it would make things crystal clear. "Baby when you did that thing it was great." But too many women and almost every girl lacks that ability to come out with feedback like that.

So the surest way for young men to learn the difference is to ask.

"Sweetheart I'm digging the direction this is going." Is a statement but also an invitation for her to make a similar statement. If she does great, but what if she doesn't? What does that indicate?




> That's an attitude that I appreciate. I'm guessing that it isn't intended, but a lot of these discussions are perceived by men as being all about what guys do wrong.


I think women have to own the fact that we make understanding us difficult. This is not due to some characterological deficit. Slvt shaming for having danced with too many boys the night before, while looking at the Victoria's Secret catalogue after Pasteur Barney's sermon on virtue makes us a little confused.

As FrenchFry said, we do our part by owning are sexuality and expecting other women to also own theirs. By teaching our daughters to own theirs.


----------



## Anon Pink

Buddy400 said:


> :iagree::iagree::iagree:
> 
> It's put more boldly than I'm comfortable with, but that's *it*.
> 
> I don't want to treat women like they are inferior. I want to treat them as my equal.


I don't know how old you are buddy but I'm pretty sure the I've mentioned a time or two this thread is about teaching our sons, who are children, not to rape. This is not about teaching players to counteract a rejection while staying within the limits of the law.

We are talking about CHILDREN! Teenager who are for the first time experiencing sex play activities! Teenagers with raging hormones and not a lot of guidance.

Teaching your son to talk through consent will HELP him immensely as he navigates sex...with a girl...as a teenager.


----------



## that.girl

I think part of the problem is we're asking grown men to understand the mind of a sixteen year old girl. 

She has zero confidence and self esteem. Seriously. 

It takes a fair amount of both to look a guy you're absolutely crazy over in the face and say no. It would be wonderful if they all could, but some can't.
We can tell them not to have sex until they can do that, but maybe they think they're ready until the moment they realize they're not. As young people, we all believed we were more mature than we really were.

We're not saying to stop teaching girls to say no. Please don't stop! We're saying to teach boys not to make too many assumptions, so they don't break their girls heart, and maybe get an undeserved rape charge as well. 

We're saying to teach them that if they kiss her and she doesn't kiss back, don't push forward. If they put their hand down her pants and don't get a favorable reaction, don't push forward. To be sensitive to her reactions. Which will also make him a better lover. 
I mean really, do you guys pay that little attention to your partners reactions in bed?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> But, to state of mind: "does making out, automatically imply consent to sex?"


It doesn't. The actual decision of whether an individual make out session constitutes implied consent lies with the jury and is case by case. It hinges on a person reasonably believing that the sexual behavior implies that she welcomed further sexual advance. I'm just telling you that what most of us would describe as making out is reliably judged by juries to be implied consent.


that.girl, there's a really important order operations thing here. Self-esteem, confidence, agency... are all things a person should have before they engage in sexual activity. Build those things in girls before they have sex, don't place their lacking those things at the feet of boys. Why don't boys seem to have this problem?

I have no issue with boys moving forward with their desires. I think they should. That assertiveness is imo an intrinsic, valuable, and defining characteristic of masculinity. If she doesn't want to move forward, the burden is on her to express that clearly. It is a drastic oversimplification to accuse men of paying little attention. Of course we're paying attention. But what we perceive can be quite different than what you're actually feeling, and we don't read minds. This is no sort of reliable basis for instruction. I reject boys being taught to be hyper-sensitive and timid because girls are delicate porcelain. I don't believe girls are. I believe our culture drives that message home, and this is just more of the same. Boys are taught to cease a given activity upon hearing "no". He will and should try again later. Teach girls what it means to be ready for sex (confidence, self-esteem, independence etc), and that it is their responsibility to say no and maintain their boundaries. Teach them that they are not delicate porcelain boys should be really careful around.

I know it sounds abrasive, but I find this to be too overbearing and protective of girls... practices I think contribute to a lack of capability in girls to handle themselves in these situations. Stop treating girls as porcelain. Encourage strong independent girls, just like we encourage strong independent boys.


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> No, it doesn't. The actual decision of whether an individual make out session constitutes implied consent lies with the jury and is case by case. It hinges on a person reasonably believing that the sexual behavior implies that she welcomed further sexual advance. *I'm just telling you that what most of us would describe as making out is reliably judged by juries to be implied consent*



And, on the last bold statement (as I have already stated), I would disagree. It is ok to agree to disagree; simply your opinion.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

NobodySpecial said:


> Do you see bashing in EVERY different opinion?


Just as many of you see sl** shaming ... ..I see these views put down all the time.. is there anyone who even agrees with me ... oh I got a few likes but I know the deal.. I am 95 % alone when I speak the other side ...

...I am not brainwashed, overly religious and bowing to cultural constraints as is constantly barfed up here by many over & over ...yes, I recognize every put down post just as you are sensitive to the other. You have far more supporters here over I... so pat yourself on the back... 

A better word is "belittling" ... any older fashioned or romantic sexual view gets blamed on religious conditioning , cultural shaming constraints ....some blame it on our Grandmothers... as if there is NOTHING, not a crumb of any value or worth to some of the romance of younger generations in waiting for love before partaking of each other....

It's not that one has to be a virgin.. but the sh** I see on TV, in the media anymore -the lengths people will go just for a FVCK blows my mind.. last night I caught Dr Drew... what was the topic... some ridiculous underwear to prevent STD's... so all the casual sex junkies can be safer...but the thing looked so ugly any woman would run like hell from it..... Oh it was comical.. What can you do but :rofl: ...but really.. it's sad how far we have fallen......and we turn a blind eye.. if this is our norm now...where will we be in 20 yrs....

then Apple did those APPs for sexual consent.. 








oh I guess they pulled that one as it was deemed Crude or objectionable.... but somehow the behaviors that led to such an app..if you are too plastered to know what the hell you are doing..is this our norm today...should we talk a little more before I stick my di** in you?.... 

Again.. SAD......some see progress in this.. now sex is reduced to a right of passage...something to "get over with"...practice, use the easy chicks while perfecting sexual skill..even when women are like snowflakes in getting off, none are the same anyhow..... it's nothing anymore.. sharing our bodies with another means no more to some than changing a pair of shoes. 

So in effect.. the growing trend is...there is no goodness... nothing honorable in waiting for Love.. and we wonder where the hell Romance went ?? 

You know what our society has boiled down to...

Peer pressure to FVCK... so long as one has the almighty *Condom* in one hand...







and *enthusiastic horny Consent *..... it's all good .. "lets get it on baby! ~ Fvck me".. no worries about tomorrow. 

No one is speaking about the *emotional ramifications* of all this haphazard sex where one is trying to figure out if it's OK to push a little harder / the fine art of seduction.. so much of this is pure selfish motivation, even EGO driven...do they even care what she may feel .. if she wants HIS care, to get to know him... maybe even more than his DI**. 

and furthermore, if she doesn't ?? so women really have arrived...they ARE like men now..... 

Well ....I don't understand those women.. I can not relate...

If she doesn't put out by the 3rd date...oh she is such a prude, drop her.... where have all the gentleman [email protected]#$%^ Is there no value in restraint while getting to know a person anymore.....

THis is my opinion.. I feel our society has become far more narcissistic over the years.... google that, the research shows... I blame much of this on our loose sexual morals where everyone is just "using" everyone ....and yes, it is a USING.. when you don't really know someone ...it sure isn't about connection...fostering love & giving..... it's using Body parts...you don't care about their wishes, desires, what hurts them, what makes them laugh, cry... you may not even want to see them the next day... is this healthy for our expressing our bodies ?? Is it so easily separated.. should it BE??? 

One female poster here, it hit me one day reading her posts..she could never understand why a man would say he needs the emotional connection -once he got married, this is utterly foreigner to her ... she's never experienced it.. they never cared before...so what gives.. you think it's healthy to drag THIS into marriage.. for a man or a woman.. this is a huge part of the disconnect so many have in their relationships today... and they can't understand why Love eludes them. 

Back to Narcissism...

Take this article >>Research says young people today are more narcissistic than ever 



> ‘People who score high in narcissism tend to have trouble in their relationships, basically because they are focused on themselves rather than on anyone else,’ says Professor Twenge. ‘There is certainly evidence for relationships not being as stable as they once were. More and more babies are born to unmarried couples rather than to married couples. People don't stay married for as long; they get married later in life. *There's a trend toward hooking up rather than being in a committed relationship.*’
> 
> According to Professor Twenge, increasing narcissism correlates with materialism and a greater focus on money, fame and image.


*Coffee4me *said this pages back >>



> I've actually been told by a few men that his behavior could just be from raging hormones not an intentional thought to do harm. Raging hormones do not make men into predators. There's a deeper dysfunction, lack of empathy, objectification of their victim


Absolutely...

Lack of Empathy: The Most Telling Narcissistic Trait
Don't expect them to listen, validate, or support you.



> "Narcissists do not consider the pain they inflict on others; nor do they give any credence to others' perceptions," says Dr. Les Carter in the book Enough of You, Let's Talk About Me (p. 9). "They simply do not care about thoughts and feelings that conflict with their own." Do not expect them to listen, validate, understand, or support you.
> 
> This is exacerbated when the person has a touch of antisocial personality disorder.


 I feel consent is not enough.. Birth control is not enough.. our society has purposely devalued Sex and continues to do so .....we don't teach our sons & daughters the value of relationships anymore... just the independence of getting their own.... this doesn't make more loving men & women by far.

Narcissists Don't Make Love | Psychology Today..... Is Casual Sex Destroying Empathy? * Hooking Up Smart 




> Take a few moments to think about what sex means to you (sexual intercourse that is).
> 
> …and…*STOP*.
> 
> Now go ahead and rate each of the 14 words below in terms of how important they are to your concept of sex, that is, what sex means to you. A rating of 1 means it's not important at all and a 9 means it's extremely important. Of course, you can also use any number between 1 and 9. Don't worry if some of the words seem a little strange. Just go with your gut instinct.
> 
> *1*. Loyalty
> 
> *2.* Power
> 
> *3*. Love
> 
> *4*. Domination
> 
> *5.* Trust
> 
> *6.* Ego
> 
> *7*. Closeness
> 
> *8*. Influence
> 
> *9.* Honesty
> 
> *10*. Leading
> 
> *11*. Respect
> 
> *12.* Manipulation
> 
> *13*. Happiness
> 
> *14*. Daring
> 
> Now add up your scores. You should get two scores. One will be for the odd numbered words and one will be for the even numbered words. Let's call your score for the odd numbered words *Communal Sexuality* and your score for the even words *Agentic Sexuality*.
> 
> People who score high relative to other people in communal sexuality tend to view sex as an act that is mutually rewarding (i.e., both partners receive something positive from it) and relationship-enhancing.
> 
> People who score high in agentic sexuality tend to view sex as personally rewarding and self-enhancing. *To some degree, sex is more about "we" to people high in communal sexuality and more about "me" to people high in agentic sexuality.*


Which is healthier ....or the more important question...

*DO WE EVEN CARE ANYMORE? *


----------



## tulsy

EleGirl said:


> That's like saying women like ice cream.. so dump a ton of it on top of the woman, she'll love it.


No, that's not at all what I was saying. That's an extreme exaggeration.

The quoted statement was that a lot of the "man-up", MMSL, NMMNG, and "women like bad-boys" comments are coming from men. There's an obvious reason for that.

The reason guys perpetuate this stuff is because it IS what they have gathered from experiences with women. 

The fact is, many boys grow up being taught to treat women with the utmost respect, and they end up getting walked all over. Some of them eventually learn a thing or two, and modify how they interact with women so that they don't get taken advantage of anymore. Others continue to get walked all over. 

Some guys really do need to "man-up", just not necessarily into an extreme alphahole.

Not all of the man-advice is bad, and it doesn't all amount to extreme alpha. It's like anything else, take some of what works with you, test some, drop what doesn't work.



EleGirl said:


> There is a fine line. Assertiveness from a guy is great. Being on overbearing, pushy "alpha" is not.
> 
> When women have tried to tell guys that a lot of this stuff coming out is not being done in the way women want... they are told that they (the women) don't know what they are talking about.
> 
> we'd have to go through scenarios to point out what the difference is between assertiveness and pushy/overbearing are.


I agree with that. And ya, there's a line....covering someone in ice-cream is way past that line.

And of course not all women are looking for Mr Hardcore Alpha. Different strokes for different folks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

It's important to listen to what women are saying when they are telling you that it's too much. That goes for being pushy and overbearing, and most definitely when it comes to physical contact.

--------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Healer

Buddy400 said:


> Me neither. I couldn't get an erection even play acting a rape scenario.
> 
> Yet, there are a lot of women out there that would think I'm not sexually attractive if I couldn't do it.


No, I can't say I would either, and honestly, I would have zero interest in playing such games. Ew.

As for the type of women who would question my manliness because of my lack of ability to do so? Adios muchacha!!


----------



## NobodySpecial

Buddy400 said:


> But how are men supposed to know that a female feels forced?
> 
> We can *guess* that a female feels forced.
> 
> The female *knows* that she feels forced.
> 
> So, why is it up to the person that can only guess to act?
> 
> Why not the person who actually knows how she feels?
> 
> Sorry. But it's up to women to say "I'm feeling forced". It can't be solved by having guy's guess how you feel and avoid putting women in this position.
> 
> BTW, Anon, it's a pleasure to talk with you. You really do seem to be trying to understand the other point of view.


So I take a different jag. A woman absolutely should own her sexuality. A guy does not have any more burden to ask than she has to speak.

That said. As a mother who would not like to see my son embroiled in any of this, my advice would be what's the harm in asking? She is as young and immature as you are.


----------



## chaos

Anon Pink said:


> I don't know how old you are buddy but I'm pretty sure the I've mentioned a time or two this thread is about teaching our sons, who are children, not to rape. This is not about teaching players to counteract a rejection while staying within the limits of the law.
> 
> We are talking about CHILDREN! Teenager who are for the first time experiencing sex play activities! Teenagers with raging hormones and not a lot of guidance.
> 
> Teaching your son to talk through consent will HELP him immensely as he navigates sex...with a girl...as a teenager.


Most teenage boys are insecure and awkward around girls their age. They are subject to BS information from other boys passing themselves as players. BS that could potentially land them in trouble with the authorities if the girl gets scared and reports him to authority figures. So teaching them the correct information on how to behave properly around girls they are attracted to, is very much needed.

My issue with you, is that you use the word rape extremely loosely. Rape is a heinous crime committed by a small percentage of violent individuals (mostly men) and your title implies that all sons are rapists until we teach them not to be which is completely and utterly false.


----------



## Cletus

And we're not the only ones talking about this. In today's Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/05/us/string-of-sexual-assault-cases-may-lead-to-tipping-point.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

"“The fix that I’d like to see,” said Erin Buzuvis, the director of the Center for Gender and Sexuality Studies at the Western New England University School of Law, “and one that is relevant whether we are talking about Cosby or the military or UVA. is to cultivate as individuals and society intolerance to the ways violence against women is normalized in the media, through sports, on TV and in movies, in video games, in advertising and online.”


----------



## naiveonedave

chaos said:


> My issue with you, is that you use the word rape extremely loosely. Rape is a heinous crime committed by a small percentage of violent individuals (mostly men) and your title implies that all sons are rapists until we teach them not to be which is completely and utterly false.


I struggle with the 'date rape' concept. I get the no means no, but the attempt to close the 'loopholes' to prosecute more young men seems more like a witch hunt than anything.

young, inexperienced, sometimes drunk couples don't think. That does not equate them to the stalker or physically violent rapists.


----------



## tulsy

Buddy400 said:


> But how are men supposed to know that a female feels forced?
> 
> We can *guess* that a female feels forced.
> 
> The female *knows* that she feels forced.
> 
> So, why is it up to the person that can only guess to act?
> 
> Why not the person who actually knows how she feels?
> 
> Sorry. But it's up to women to say "I'm feeling forced". It can't be solved by having guy's guess how you feel and avoid putting women in this position.
> 
> BTW, Anon, it's a pleasure to talk with you. You really do seem to be trying to understand the other point of view.


Honestly, as a man, I can more than "guess" if a woman feels forced. If she feels forced, her body-language won't be "all-in".

In my experience, if a woman wants to have sex, she is all over me for sex. 

If the roles are reversed and I'm being the aggressor, I can very easily gauge her reaction to what I'm doing, where I'm touching, how I'm kissing her, etc. I can easily tell by how she responds if she's into it. If for some reason she doesn't seem into it, I certainly wouldn't escalate, I'd back off. 

I'm not interested in having sex with someone who doesn't really want to have sex with me. Nothing about that is a turn-on. I'd rather beat-off.

If she's *never* into it, she's not the girl for you and you should move on.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> And, on the last bold statement (as I have already stated), I would disagree. It is ok to agree to disagree; simply your opinion.


I wasn't presenting an opinion. I was presenting a fact.

Implied consent defenses are used by the vast majority of date rape defendants as a result.


----------



## Cletus

tulsy said:


> I'm not interested in having sex with someone who doesn't really want to have sex with me. Nothing about that is a turn-on. I'd rather beat-off.


Me neither. Everybody nods their head, gives you likes, and says "why isn't every man like this?"

But I am ever amazed by the number of men who will use "any ol' hole in a storm", so to speak. Which is how I know that you don't speak for all men. I don't even know if you speak for the majority, frankly.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SimplyAmorous said:


> Just as many of you see sl** shaming ... ..I see these views put down all the time.. is there anyone who even agrees with me ... oh I got a few likes but I know the deal.. I am 95 % alone when I speak the other side ...


I cannot imagine what you read in my post that yields this response. SadSam said he would prefer they abstain. I asked why. He answered. I shared my view. Which you disagree with. Then flipped out all over me.

You can't be talking to me. I don't even know what this slvt shaming business is.


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I wasn't presenting an opinion. I was presenting a fact.
> 
> 
> 
> Implied consent defenses are used by the vast majority of date rape defendants as a result.



Ok, but do those facts always imply, making out as an implied consent? How does one present state of mind as a defense, when consent can't be given by the defendant? I say again, you are expressing your opinion and welcome to do so.


----------



## SadSamIAm

Anon Pink said:


> Well thank you buddy, that was a very nice thing to say and I appreciate it. Because it is very hard to discuss things such as this without huge disconnects in meaning and considering the history of some women participating, not to mention how men might feel they're being branded unfairly...it's hard to keep things civil.
> 
> "*The female knows that she feels forced.
> 
> So, why is it up to the person that can only guess to act?*"
> 
> Okay. Ask yourself what is happening that makes her feel forced? Is SHE doing something or is HE doing something? Who is doing the something that is causing the feeling?


Here is an example:

You are at the dentist. He is poking around in your mouth doing his checkup. He starts poking at something that is hurting you. 

How does he know that you are feeling pain if you have no reaction at all?


----------



## that.girl

If i make a funny face, my dentist asks if I'm ok. Sometimes even if i just close my eyes.

He doesn't wait for me to say something, he watches my reactions.


----------



## SadSamIAm

that.girl said:


> I think part of the problem is we're asking grown men to understand the mind of a sixteen year old girl.


And the mindset of a 16 year old boy



> She has zero confidence and self esteem. Seriously.


Just like most 16 year old boys when it comes to their first sexual experiences.



> It takes a fair amount of both to look a guy you're absolutely crazy over in the face and say no.


Same for the 16 year old boy to stop with no indication he needs to when he is crazy in love and turned on from making out.




> We can tell them not to have sex until they can do that, but maybe they think they're ready until the moment they realize they're not. As young people, we all believed we were more mature than we really were.


The boy included. Not mature enough or experienced enough. He needs something to realize that she suddenly decided she wasn't ready.





> We're not saying to stop teaching girls to say no. Please don't stop! We're saying to teach boys not to make too many assumptions, so they don't break their girls heart, and maybe get an undeserved rape charge as well.
> 
> We're saying to teach them that if they kiss her and she doesn't kiss back, don't push forward. If they put their hand down her pants and don't get a favorable reaction, don't push forward. To be sensitive to her reactions. Which will also make him a better lover.


Yes, she needs to have some kind of obvious reaction. Remember we are talking about 16 year old boys here.



> I mean really, do you guys pay that little attention to your partners reactions in bed?


Remember we are talking about 16 year old boys here.


----------



## SadSamIAm

that.girl said:


> If i make a funny face, my dentist asks if I'm ok. Sometimes even if i just close my eyes.
> 
> He doesn't wait for me to say something, he watches my reactions.


And he is a trained professional.

Now think about a 16 year old boy who is trying to do his best and is too nervous to even look at the girl.


----------



## that.girl

SadSamIAm said:


> Yes, she needs to have some kind of obvious reaction. Remember we are talking about 16 year old boys here.


Are you saying it's not worth teaching them because they won't remember anyway? 
Some won't. Some will. I think it's worth a shot. If we don't tell them, they DEFINITELY won't know. 

It's our job as parents to give them the tools. It's up to them to use them. BOTH sexes.


----------



## chaos

Cletus said:


> And we're not the only ones talking about this. In today's Times:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/05/us/string-of-sexual-assault-cases-may-lead-to-tipping-point.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
> 
> "“The fix that I’d like to see,” said Erin Buzuvis, the director of the Center for Gender and Sexuality Studies at the Western New England University School of Law, “and one that is relevant whether we are talking about Cosby or the military or UVA. is to cultivate as individuals and society intolerance to the ways violence against women is normalized in the media, through sports, on TV and in movies, in video games, in advertising and online.”


So much has emphasis has been put on violence against women that an inconvenient truth in gender politics has been deliberately ignored.

From Karen Sternheimer's article titled Who is Most Likely to be a Crime Victim?:



> The Bureau of Justice Statistics has conducted the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) each year since 1973, asking a random sample of Americans twelve and older about their experiences with crime during the past year.
> 
> This survey is important because many crimes, especially minor crimes like theft, never get reported to police. So if we relied solely on law enforcement agency data, we might never get a good picture of the prevalence of crime. For instance, by comparing the NCVS to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, a database of crimes and arrests based on law enforcement data, we can also get an idea of how many rapes get reported to the police and how many don’t.
> 
> Here are some things the NCVS teaches us about crime victimization from 1973 to 2006, the most recent year for which data are available:
> 
> *4. Males are more likely to be victims of violence than females *
> 
> With the exception of rape, males are more likely to be the victims of violent crime than females are. As Sally Raskoff blogged about last year, we tend to believe that females are more vulnerable to violence. Boys and men are more likely to be victims of assault, robbery, and homicide than girls or women are.


----------



## SadSamIAm

Today at lunch I brought up this subject to my son. He is in his first year of University. 

Told him I was involved in this discussion about 'Teach sons not to rape'. His immediate comment was 'Any guy you have to teach not to rape, isn't going to listen to you.'

Anyhow, I gave him the example of making out with some girl and progressing to the point where you pull down her panties and have sex with her. That later you find out that she was totally scared and couldn't move.

His comment, "How was I supposed to know that? It's her own fault if she didn't say anything."

I said, the comments are that the boy needs to ensure that she wants to do it before doing it, by asking her. His comment was that most girls don't say anything. They don't want to talk about it. That he would look stupid if he asked. 

Anyhow, I told him that he should think about this and that if he isn't sure if the girl is into it, then he should ask to make sure. To protect himself and also to ensure he doesn't hurt her. He said, "Yeah I guess."

I asked him if he had ever heard of any girls getting raped, or feeling like they got raped. Or any of his buddies that were accused of something like that. His reply was something like 'Are you kidding me? That almost never happens.'

I told him it happens more than most people think. Most of the times it isn't reported, so nobody hears about it. 

Glad I had the talk with him. He told me what I was expecting to hear. But I think he might give it some thought if he is ever in such a situation.


----------



## chaos

FrenchFry said:


> Start a thread on male violence.
> 
> Or we can talk about how we should teach our sons not to rape other men but I'm pretty sure it's the same discussion.


Nobody said anything to Cletus for his thread jacking post, why do you single me out for mine?


----------



## Cletus

chaos said:


> Nobody said anything to Cletus for his thread jacking post, why do you single me out for mine?


I have her implied consent.


----------



## chaos

Cletus said:


> I have her implied consent.


:lol::rofl:


----------



## Buddy400

Anon Pink said:


> I don't know how old you are buddy but I'm pretty sure the I've mentioned a time or two this thread is about teaching our sons, who are children, not to rape. This is not about teaching players to counteract a rejection while staying within the limits of the law.
> 
> We are talking about CHILDREN! Teenager who are for the first time experiencing sex play activities! Teenagers with raging hormones and not a lot of guidance.
> 
> Teaching your son to talk through consent will HELP him immensely as he navigates sex...with a girl...as a teenager.


I'm way too old. I do have two sons and a daughter between 20 and 23. So, it matters to me but I'm mostly interested from a "social problems" perspective.

If the young women have a problem figuring out what they should and shouldn't do (or want and shouldn't want), young men are in even worse shape. I wouldn't count on young men between 16 and 21 making any good decisions. 

Neither son is any kind of aggressor that would push a girl farther than she wants to go. However, I do worry a little about them hooking up with head cases that could wrongly accuse them. I try to teach them to avoid those.

One son just seems to meet aggressor girls. If I've had to do anything with the boys it's been to disabuse them of the notion that the way to a girl's heart is to be "nice". The youngest has had a hottie all over him who says she likes him because he's the "first boyfriend she's had that didn't put up with her sh!t".

My daughter is very self-aware and knows when to say "No" or "Yes".


----------



## southbound

NobodySpecial said:


> Why do you want to tell them to abstain?


Huh? Have times changed so much that wanting your kids to abstain until someone special comes along is now strange?




SimplyAmorous said:


> Not speaking for anyone else on this thread, only myself...some of us feel this is best for their lives and futures.. the more I read on this forum, it's so obvious the tide has changed so much, we now have bashing for those who feel this way..
> 
> I am a little offended every time I read someone putting down these views... basically "sex is JUST SEX"....that it's not something valuable enough to wait for someone very very special.
> 
> I don't want my own children to spit in the face of this.. Some of us find it very beautiful, worthy of the wait..


I agree!


----------



## Faithful Wife

I asked my 26 year old son the same thing last night. He said you begin by teaching them actions have consequences, then by teaching them not to abuse their power by explaining the consequences of doing so (the only consequence sometimes being empathy and guilt). So even though you can get away with something, you teach them not to. You teach them to want to rise above impulses that would harm others. 

Then he said you teach them about privilege and how much of it they may have and how this can lead to an abuse of power.

Then he said when it is age appropriate you teach them about consent.

But the main thing he was getting at is teaching them never to hurt others in the process of trying to please themselves. 

Because I had many talks with him about his body and sex and masturbation and pleasure, he said that all of this was assuming the parent had also taught them those things openly like I did.

He also said parents should discuss news stories about rape and sexual assault with their kids so they can see real world examples of a concept they have no reference for.


----------



## Cletus

It's gotten a little air time on this thread, but I'd like to add -

Society seems in general to be moving away from sticks and more towards carrots when it comes to behavior modification (as a husband of a teacher, I see this more than most).

This is an area where I wouldn't mind seeing more stick. There's nothing wrong with telling your son to be kind, considerate, caring, and attentive, but failing that, if I hear you assaulted a woman, I brought you into this world and I will take you out. Or, more accurately, I will be the one hauling you down to the police station for your mugshot and booking, and I'll be certain to paste the information all over your Facebook page.


----------



## NobodySpecial

southbound said:


> Huh? Have times changed so much that wanting your kids to abstain until someone special comes along is now strange?


I did not say it was strange. I did not say not to wait for someone special. I simply suggested that there is no real reason to think that young people are going to learn about sex any other way than anything else that they learn, experience. I think that society makes to much of a Big F'ing Deal out of sex. Girls' virginity is a big deal. "Losing" it, like it was some kind of treasure, is a big deal. I can't really see why. Boys see sex as conquest or accomplishment. Honor roll is an accomplishment. These attitudes stifle healthy learning. And when a parent has a don't do it attitude, it makes them less available when the kids have issues or concerns.


----------



## chaos

FrenchFry said:


> Because yours is a classic derailment (Stop talking about rape, talk about violence against men). His wasn't.


Was it?. The comment quoted talked about violence on women and the media. Nothing in the quoted comment had the word rape in it or teaching sons.


----------



## Buddy400

Faithful Wife said:


> But the main thing he was getting at is teaching them never to hurt others in the process of trying to please themselves.


:iagree:


----------



## ConanHub

Cletus said:


> It's gotten a little air time on this thread, but I'd like to add -
> 
> Society seems in general to be moving away from sticks and more towards carrots when it comes to behavior modification (as a husband of a teacher, I see this more than most).
> 
> This is an area where I wouldn't mind seeing more stick. There's nothing wrong with telling your son to be kind, considerate, caring, and attentive, but failing that, if I hear you assaulted a woman, I brought you into this world and I will take you out. Or, more accurately, I will be the one hauling you down to the police station for your mugshot and booking, and I'll be certain to paste the information all over your Facebook page.


Spoke to my heart there. If one of my sons assaulted a girl in any fashion, everyone would have to get in line behind me to kick his butt.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub

NobodySpecial said:


> I did not say it was strange. I did not say not to wait for someone special. I simply suggested that there is no real reason to think that young people are going to learn about sex any other way than anything else that they learn, experience. I think that society makes to much of a Big F'ing Deal out of sex. Girls' virginity is a big deal. "Losing" it, like it was some kind of treasure, is a big deal. I can't really see why. Boys see sex as conquest or accomplishment. Honor roll is an accomplishment. These attitudes stifle healthy learning. And when a parent has a don't do it attitude, it makes them less available when the kids have issues or concerns.


I didn't start that way. I always thought it was special. The girls I ran into did not. I eventually gave up. I finally found someone like minded and now I believe it to be exceptionally special and should be reserved exclusively for your mate.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife

Conan I'm sure your childhood abuse is part of why you felt it was special. You had already learned sex can be an abusive or violent act so you had a different perspective because of it.


----------



## ConanHub

I appreciate that. I really do still believe that now. Just a counter perspective. I am all about talking about it thoroughly and all the time however.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial

ConanHub said:


> I didn't start that way. I always thought it was special. The girls I ran into did not. I eventually gave up. I finally found someone like minded and now I believe it to be exceptionally special and should be reserved exclusively for your mate.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I have no particular problem with that. But I am struck by a couple things. I may well be reading too much into your words! So feel free to straighten me out. You say "the girls you ran into". Were you hoping that sex would make the relationship special? Or was the relationship being special what makes the sex special?

In any event, on the way to that place, I do think failing to get experience is a large reason you see sexual dysfunction and incompatibility, even huge discomfort with sex, is such a big problem for many marriages. YMMV


----------



## HuggyBear

Anon Pink said:


> Excellent replies.
> 
> However I still wonder how a parent teaches a son the difference between taking the lead and taking. This is an issue I see among younger girls and date rape. Not having sons myself, I've always wondered how this topic is handled. Your sons are going to date. They are going to want to get to certain bases. How do you teach them when it's okay to go for it and when it's not?
> 
> Huggybear, I'm not sure I follow you. Could you expand on this more?


You have to teach a person that someone is below them, in society, intelligence, wealth, or some other sort of imagined difference like race or religion... to make it seem in some sick mind that it is okay to victimize this person... to say someone "deserved it because.." of a short skirt, too much makeup, lives on the poor part of town, was having sex with others to begin with, was drunk, needed help, was "different" an nobody liked that person, anyways... If you can't figure out the difference between teaching "good" and "bad" you probably shouldn't have kids.


----------



## ConanHub

NobodySpecial said:


> I have no particular problem with that. But I am struck by a couple things. I may well be reading too much into your words! So feel free to straighten me out. You say "the girls you ran into". Were you hoping that sex would make the relationship special? Or was the relationship being special what makes the sex special?
> 
> In any event, on the way to that place, I do think failing to get experience is a large reason you see sexual dysfunction and incompatibility, even huge discomfort with sex, is such a big problem for many marriages. YMMV


By the girls I ran into, I mean all of them. I believed relationships and sex were exclusive and special. I approached girls with this mindset. They all wanted to have a couple beers and take their clothes off. They were mostly nice girls, just not what I was expecting.

After years of finding girls seemed to mostly want sex and after I had my heart broken, I gave up and just started hooking up.

I believe most sexual dysfunction in healthy adults comes from lack of education and conversation not a lack of sex partners.

My wife and I were like virgins in many ways. We had to work a lot to figure out each others bodies limits and wants. We both had a lot of previous partners but we were unique. All the other women really only got in my way when trying to figure out my wife.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## southbound

NobodySpecial said:


> I did not say it was strange. I did not say not to wait for someone special. I simply suggested that there is no real reason to think that young people are going to learn about sex any other way than anything else that they learn, experience. I think that society makes to much of a Big F'ing Deal out of sex. Girls' virginity is a big deal. "Losing" it, like it was some kind of treasure, is a big deal. I can't really see why. Boys see sex as conquest or accomplishment. Honor roll is an accomplishment. These attitudes stifle healthy learning. And when a parent has a don't do it attitude, it makes them less available when the kids have issues or concerns.


I see. this is one of those things where neither of us will change the other's belief; this issue just depends on one's personal beliefs. My belief is the opposite of yours, but I won't try to convince you of anything else.


----------



## NobodySpecial

southbound said:


> I see. this is one of those things where neither of us will change the other's belief; this issue just depends on one's personal beliefs. My belief is the opposite of yours, but I won't try to convince you of anything else.


I was not trying to convince you or anyone else. Simply registering an opinion. Cheers.


----------



## heartsbeating

JCD said:


> How many of you women in your teen and twenties reached out and kissed a guy first?


He was a year or two older than me. We were at the movies. I think he'd put his arm around me and I was having trouble concentrating on what we were watching. I whispered something like, 'I want to kiss you, do you want to kiss me?' or something as equally as smooth for a teenager. I didn't see the rest of the movie. We left the theater, both wearing smudged lipstick, all classy-like. That was my first kiss and I initiated it. Not really sure what it has to do with the topic. Maybe someone can clarify? I think there's a place for flirtation rather than being direct all the time. However I also think there's a responsibility on both sides to communicate what's acceptable and what's not. As well as being aware of reading cues and paying attention. 

Those times as a teenager that I made-out with guys and never felt pressure or dealt with anything I didn't want to have happen - how did they learn to know what was cool? When I was 17, I had a crush on a male friend's slightly older brother (by a couple of years at most). Met at a party, bumped into each other in the bathroom, he made the move of kissing me and we went to his room and made-out. I was still very innocent compared to most of my peers. I do remember him asking if I was okay with what was happening between us... it was in such a way there was nothing weird or awkward about it. We didn't have sex or come that close to it. He did give me my first hickey. We went on a date afterwards, found we didn't have much in common and no more came of it. Although somehow we did end up going to see Pearl Jam in concert together, all 90s stylee, but that's best left for a music thread... 

In that scenario, how did he learn to be that way and ask? What is the default behavior of teens and young men? It does seem that having those kind of open conversations for times when there may be uncertainty, would be worthwhile.


----------



## Anon Pink

Now chaos, I was nice to you. And I'm going to continue to be nice to you. So nice in fact, I'm going to give you a free lesson in speech and word usage. Yes I know I'm extremely kind. 




chaos said:


> Most teenage boys are insecure and awkward around girls their age. They are subject to BS information from other boys passing themselves as players. BS that could potentially land them in trouble with the authorities if the girl gets scared and reports him to authority figures. So teaching them the correct information on how to behave properly around girls they are attracted to, is very much needed.
> 
> *My issue with you,* is that you use the word rape extremely loosely. Rape is a heinous crime committed by a small percentage of violent individuals (mostly men) and your title implies that all sons are rapists until we teach them not to be which is completely and utterly false.



My issue with you? Does this mean you hate hate me due to this issue you have with me? And is this me personally or the ideas I've put forth in this thread?

Might I suggest you try different words to express yourself? Instead of '"my issue with you" it probably would have sounded much less personally offensive if you had said, "my issue with this" or "my issue with that idea..."

Because if you had taken the trouble to read MY posts, you would have read the conflict I have with using that word to apply to my experience. The trouble is, I have no better word to convey what happened, how it felt and the consequences I suffered as a result. 

Secondly, rape is not always violent. In fact most rapes are NOT violent. Wanna know why? Most men can easily over power a woman. They don't HAVE to beat the **** out of us in order to over power us.

And lastly, not once, NOT ONCE has anyone in this thread even come to close to suggesting all men are potential rapists. The title of this thread was a lay on another thread that asked about teaching women to avoid rape. Well, the easiest way to avoid rape is to teach your sons not to do that. Make sense?


----------



## Shoto1984

chaos said:


> :iagree:
> 
> A study published in 2002 by David Lisak and Paul Miller titled Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists reveals some interesting results. But if you don't want to read the entire study, then read this excerpt from Amanda Marcotte's Salon magazine article titled Rape Victims Are Common Rapists Are Not


^^^^^

This is what you build on if you're serious about the issue. We touched on this on something like page 7 of this thread and have been spinning wheels ever since. The answer is for the vast majority of our sons what we've been teaching them is just fine and they're not doing anything wrong. The key is to focus teaching efforts at the group that is (or is likely to be) doing the offending. Now we should all feel much better having solved that one. What shall we tackle next.


----------



## Anon Pink

naiveonedave said:


> I struggle with the 'date rape' concept. I get the no means no, but the attempt to close the 'loopholes' to prosecute more young men seems more like a witch hunt than anything.
> 
> young, inexperienced, sometimes drunk couples don't think. That does not equate them to the stalker or physically violent rapists.


I get that feeling. I honestly do. Back in my single days drunken hook ups were something men pursued and the wise woman didn't get drunk without a wingman to look out for her. It was clearly a situation of supplier beware. The drunk chick was the low hanging fruit, easy pickings. On a few occasions I lost all respect for the guys in my circle who went after the drunken hook ups and instead helped the girl out by protecting her.

Drunk couples don't think. Very true.

I just watched Austin Powers the other day with my daughter. There was a scene in which the woman is drunk and strongly coming on to him. But he made it very clear, he didn't do drunk women.

What do you think about that? About making a personal rule that unless you have a marriage or prior sexual relationship you don't do drunk women?

Because men don't usually get fvcked just because they've had too much to drink. I know now one wants to call it rape so I changed the word. How many men in this thread have gotten drunk and had a woman take advantage of that?

Now how many women in this thread have gotten drunk and had a man take advantage of it?


----------



## Shoto1984

Anon Pink said:


> And lastly, not once, NOT ONCE has anyone in this thread even come to close to suggesting all men are potential rapists. The title of this thread was a lay on another thread that asked about teaching women to avoid rape. Well, the easiest way to avoid rape is to teach your sons not to do that. Make sense?


So Anon I think many of the men read the thread title to do just that "suggest all men are potential rapists". A thread titled "why do women invite rape" would have been closer on the flip side. Regardless, I don't venture into the Ladies Lounge very often but this has seemed from the start like some kind of tit for tat retribution stunt.


----------



## ConanHub

My first time was with a girl that cane on to me at prom. She was drunk. I did kiss her and she got her hands down my pants but I stopped her and took her home. When I dropped her off, this super sensual wild party girl turned around and gave me one of the most innocent and beautiful kisses I have ever received. It was so sweet it was surreal.

A few months later, when sober, she got me alone and had her way with me.

If a girl is drunk or even close, the answer should be no to sex with her. If you are both drunk, oh well!&#55357;&#56842;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon Pink

Shoto1984 said:


> So Anon I think many of the men read the thread title to do just that "suggest all men are potential rapists". A thread titled "why do women invite rape" would have been closer on the flip side. Regardless, I don't venture into the Ladies Lounge very often but this has seemed from the start like some kind of tit for tat retribution stunt.



In that case it would behoove you men to actually READ the opening post.

Why is that we can't talk about rape with at least a few men feeling attacked? I purposely made this thread about our children so that the men wouldn't feel attacked...and it still happened!

So how do we have this conversation? What words should I use or not use?


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> As usual Cletus you make a very salient point about who owns the burden of gaining consent when the action is inherently fraught with ambiguities.
> 
> While it seems obvious to me, that the person who is doing the action of crossing a line and escalating physical intimacy is the same person who needs to seek consent, I can understand how that burden might feel unfair.



It is not so much that the burden is unfair, it is that the potential punishments of guessing consent wrong (with these uncommunicative women) is so bloody high!

Example: I go in for a feel. 

Guess correctly: get a feel.

Guess Incorrectly: Scream! (to gaggle of girlfriends) "Do you know, that guy is SUCH a sexual assaulter", "I don't want to see you any more. How COULD you?"

Is it any wonder why guys might consider a a beer or some X box as a bit of more...mmm....trustworthy bit of pleasure.








> No, I don't. But this is the way it SHOULD be.
> 
> LOL, I think it means a lot of men are settling for good enough!


Or as good as they can find which does not presume 'enough'


----------



## JCD

Shoto1984 said:


> Careful... you're on thin ice here lol We all (women included) need to work to change the culture if that is what we want. When the music award shows are on and the women singers are on stage grinding in body suits there needs to be outrage and boycotts. When Victoria Secret launches their new campaign featuring very young women wearing next to nothing with that Come-F**k-Me look on their face there needs to be demonstrations. You can't keep feeding the masses hyper sexualizing messages and expect it to have no effect.


This is not so much about hypersexualization. That is a different topic, IMO.

This is about women assume, and even demand, that men be sexual aggressors AND YET also wish to keep a hair trigger and very low bar to consent and sexual assault.

In some ways, (sorry ladies) they want total control of the entire situation. And yet they do not see this 'my way or the highway...excuse me, jail' attitude as being a 'gatekeeper'.

The person who can say 'no' is the person in control. Look at mom/dad vs. kids. I do not know that women always use that power wisely.

That being said: this is the perspective on the outside looking in!

A woman will read this and say "ARE YOU FRIGGING CRAZY! If I don't 'put out' when he wants sex, now I'm in the dog house! I might get dumped, even if I think he's special and I'm not ready. I can't help how I feel about sex and this 'three dates and done' rule is VERY UNCOMFORTABLE because three days...hell, I'll barely learn his middle name, much less know if he's a good man."

There is relentless pressure on both sides and it darned well FEELS unfair on both sides, I'm sure.

Not sure if this is germane, but it does relate to 'consent'


----------



## JCD

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> My last post in this thread, as I think things have run their course, and I'm spending too much time on it. (damn forum addictions)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't change anything. The definition of consent is consistent with implied or express consent. The law accepts both as consent.
> 
> That someone just lays there is no change to the status quo where consent has already been implied by her participation. I understand you don't like that, but that's really how it is.
> 
> If you'd like to change state laws to explicitly require express consent before penetration, well that's another thing entirely. By such a definition, you'd basically be saying most sex had today is rape. In transition from foreplay to intercourse, how many people stop and ask?
> 
> I regularly have sex that doesn't involve her doing much of anything - it's called doggy style. Should we stop and explicitly ask for consent each time she stops moving? Most women are pretty still during oral sex and finger play as well. Should consent be asked for in each advance higher on the scale of intimacy? Can I kiss you? Can I touch your breast? Can I put it in? I don't know about you, but my intimate life certainly doesn't look like that. It is because of all that ambiguity that the burden lies with women to say no.
> 
> A fair minded person recognizes progression from one thing to another as fluid and most often unspoken. Consent for the new advance being implied by participation in the last.
> 
> Another common scenario is a married couple that just crawled into bed and is spooning. She's is awake, but doesn't move. He decides to rub up on her and transition to spooning sex. She doesn't move. Is this rape? With no other factors, it's not. Consent is implied by the marriage relationship, and there is no withdrawal of consent or resistance. He has no reason to believe he is unwelcomed. Plenty of sleepy married sex relies on implied consent.
> 
> You're simply not going to get a conviction of rape where consent is implied, and she puts up no resistance.
> 
> It's not even uncommon to hear from women that they weren't in the mood for it, until he started doing it. That's something that ceases to exist without implied consent that she doesn't actually oppose his attempt.
> 
> We cannot be vague about rape. It must be consistent. *Either we demand that express consent always required, or the burden lies with women to say no, because men can't read women's minds and there are many circumstances where a woman chooses to just lie back and relax, and many circumstances where consent is implied.*
> 
> Freezing up is unfortunate, tragic even... but no failing or abuse of his. Given no change in status quo, it's simply not enough information for him to know that you mean for him to stop. Most of the times I've gone down on a woman for example, they are quiet and still at first. Am I to believe they've withdrawn consent? Of course not.
> 
> Saying no is the simplest of solutions. It has no ambiguity. If you're not confident enough, or comfortable enough with someone to say no, and maintain your boundaries, you really shouldn't be engaging in any sexual activity.
> 
> You were all about it, then you weren't, but you didn't tell him that. If we're on a first date and I move in for a first kiss at the end of the night - even only a peck - and she doesn't pull away, it's only reasonable to judge that she consented to the kiss. We don't ask if we may kiss, and most women don't want to hear him ask. So it goes along the entire sexual scale, and this is recognized by the legal system. Someone jumps out and initiates/escalates to the next step of intimacy based on perception of comfort with the last without asking. If we want that to exist, and I think most do, then we must have a concept of implied consent.
> 
> If you want men to explicitly ask for express consent immediately prior to intercourse, well that's fine... change the law. But regardless, one will still have to say no or resist to withdraw that consent after it is given - so freezing up is still an issue! Shall we define stillness as withdrawal of consent? Imagine you lie still for a moment enjoying what you're feeling, so we stop. That's gonna be hilarious given that a significant percentage of women just lay still concentrating their own feeling for at least a portion of a sexual encounter in order to orgasm.
> 
> This to me is just offloading responsibility for herself to the man. Are you ok? Are you ok? If she's not, SHE should just speak up and say so.


:iagree:


----------



## EleGirl

Shoto1984 said:


> ^^^^^
> 
> This is what you build on if you're serious about the issue. We touched on this on something like page 7 of this thread and have been spinning wheels ever since. The answer is for the vast majority of our sons what we've been teaching them is just fine and they're not doing anything wrong. The key is to focus teaching efforts at the group that is (or is likely to be) doing the offending. Now we should all feel much better having solved that one. What shall we tackle next.



We no longer live in a society where the parents of 'good girls' protect them by never letting them be alone with guy, always make sure that there is a chaperone, and marry girls off young to avoid premarital sex. 

Both boy/men and girls/women need to do a much better with understanding and setting boundaries. We keep hearing that innocent boys and young men are being accused of rape when all it really is, is that the saturation is confusing. This can be fixed for the most part by teaching young people some things.

Girls need to be taught to avoid behaviors that put them at risk; to say "NO" firmly when that's what they mean; to not say "NO" as part of being coy. 

Boys need to learn that the stuff they hear about "no" means "yes" and other such things, are not acceptable and why they are no acceptable. They need to be taught what is acceptable.

So maybe, when those young kids get together an are nervous, at least on of them will remember to talk about their boundaries, talk about consent, say no when they mean no, etc.

This is not about accusing all boys/men of being rapists. Most of us have sons and daughters. We don't want either of them on the wrong side of a situation that can go downhill because they are naïve.

The other thing is that while most men are not rapists, most rapists are men. And we have no idea which are which. If we teach all kids, boys and girls, a better way to handle things.. than perhaps, when young men are all talking smack about their conquests, the good kids will recognize the one guy in the group who has a problem. They can tell someone. They can tell the kid he's not funny and his actions/words are unacceptable. 

I actually had this happen. A young boy, age 10, in extended family came and told me that there as a boy 12 years old who was talking about things that were not right. The 10 year old told me that the 12 year old kept talking about raping girls and other disturbing things. After we (the parents) looked into it, we found out that the 12 year old had already started to sexually assault younger girls in the neighborhood. The girls were scared and had not told anyone. 

The 12 year old is from a good family, but he has issues. His parents got him into a program for young sex offenders. Today this kid is 28. He still has impulse control issues. But, because he got the help he needed, he is not offending sexually.

Teaching girls that they need to be careful, to say no in very clear terms, is not saying that they deserve to be raped or cause rape.

Teaching boys to get consent, and what are appropriate ways to handle things is not accusing them of being rapists.

This is just raising smarter kids.

Studies are saying 1 out of 5 women report being sexually assaulted.

*The latest study on men being sexually assaulted. Now men are reporting that they are sexually assaulted about as often as women are. 60% of those sexual assaults against men are by another man. And the men are saying that 40% of against men by women.. drinking/drugs are usually involved and forced penetration is the most common assault by a woman against a man.*

So, it seems that your sons are as vulnerable. Perhaps our boys need to be taught a lot more on this topic. Most boy never tell anyone when they are sexually assaulted and/or raped. They need to feel safe enough to come forward and report what has happened.


----------



## JCD

that.girl said:


> These rules are intended not so much for marriage (which is a level of implied consent in itself), but for new partners, with whom you are not familiar. You know your wife's signals.
> If i was on a first date and kissed a guy, and he did not kiss me back, i wouldn't continue. I would stop and see what the problem was.
> These rules are intended to help inexperienced young people find and communicate their boundaries, which is probably a new situation for them.


Herein lies a problem. During reading about this, I read this one story about a woman. She had had intercourse with the guy three times before.

Then he decided to 'go crazy' during a sexual session. She didn't like what he was doing and she said no. He stopped...then tried again and when she said no this time, he did not stop.

And this had been a pattern for several girl friends who then got together.

Now, this was rape. No question. I can read this guys mind though "Hmm...I want to do X...She doesn't. She's not a 'keeper' so I'm just going to do what I want because we are going to break up anyway..." He probably considers it a bit of 'grudge fv*king' at worst.

BUT...that is not what I want to focus on. It is that 'rape' can be called at any time. We need to figure out consent rules for EVERY TIME, not just dewy young lovers meeting in a meadow for the first time.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> That's a good post Chaos.
> 
> Just to fine tune a point, we're not specifically targeting men who won't take no for an answer, we are attempting to include all incidences in which a female feels forced.
> 
> 
> And I can hear you rolling your eyes Buster!


That's 'Badger'.

And La Dee Frigging DA! You feel forced. I FEEL forced when my boss makes me work Christmas. I feel forced when I am told the whole family needs to get together in Paris for a vacation and I want to scream at them about the realities of money. Life is frequently about doing things you don't want to do an it is certainly no monopoly of women.

So 'forced'. Feh! We have enough trouble judging rape and consent. Trying to cater to every bit of emotional neediness in both genders is a bit off topic.

Let's get this nailed down first, mm-kay?


----------



## Cletus

Anon Pink said:


> How many men in this thread have gotten drunk and had a woman take advantage of that?


Me.


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> Herein lies a problem. During reading about this, I read this one story about a woman. She had had intercourse with the guy three times before.
> 
> Then he decided to 'go crazy' during a sexual session. She didn't like what he was doing and she said no. He stopped...then tried again and when she said no this time, he did not stop.
> 
> And this had been a pattern for several girl friends who then got together.
> 
> Now, this was rape. No question. I can read this guys mind though "Hmm...I want to do X...She doesn't. She's not a 'keeper' so I'm just going to do what I want because we are going to break up anyway..." He probably considers it a bit of 'grudge fv*king' at worst.
> 
> BUT...that is not what I want to focus on. It is that 'rape' can be called at any time. We need to figure out consent rules for EVERY TIME, not just dewy young lovers meeting in a meadow for the first time.


It really is very simple. 

Rules:
1. No means no. Always. Every damn time.
2. Silence is not consent.

Done. I'll have that drink now.


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> Me.


What happened? How did you feel about it? How did you handle it?


----------



## Faithful Wife

I've taken advantage of lots of drunk men.

Anyway...

It is interesting that we have at least a dozen first account stories of rape, sexual assault, and sex-without-consent by women here (and also by a couple of men)...yet we have only one first hand account of a false rape charge against him.


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> That's 'Badger'.
> 
> And La Dee Frigging DA! You feel forced. I FEEL forced when my boss makes me work Christmas. I feel forced when I am told the whole family needs to get together in Paris for a vacation and I want to scream at them about the realities of money. Life is frequently about doing things you don't want to do an it is certainly no monopoly of women.
> 
> So 'forced'. Feh! We have enough trouble judging rape and consent. Trying to cater to every bit of emotional neediness in both genders is a bit off topic.
> 
> Let's get this nailed down first, mm-kay?


Did you seriously just equate what happened to me with you having to work over Christmas? 

Look badger boy, I make a lot of allowances for someone making a point in a heated manner, so I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were attempting humor and had no idea just how flat it would fall.

MMMkay hon?


----------



## Faithful Wife

I personally have always said that women and men both should just get it all out there on the table and have discussions about everything before you even touch each other. And I would advocate this to teens as well.

Then when I suggest this, men come back and say "but what a boner killer to have to TALK about it".

And I say "yet you want to prevent false rape charges."

Then men say "but women don't WANT to tell you they want to be coy".

And I say "Who gives a crap, those days are over. Girls and women, OWN your sexuality, all of you, and be able to state your consent verbally at all times, or else forget playing around, period".

Then the men STILL say "but you women don't WANT to own your sexuality, so we are stuck reading minds".

And I say "again, too bad if women don't want to own it, they must. And men must own the same, as women can and do rape men, too."

Yet still...."but women don't...but they won't...but boner killer..."

Get over it, guys. Women will get over their crap, too. If we TEACH our kids to do it right and not like WE DID IT, then this subject will be moot.

And that is exactly what young people are doing and learning right now, whether we show them the way or not, they've got it figured out and are actually teaching US.


----------



## JCD

Ikaika said:


> But you went not from making out to sexual consent. And that is what confused me. How do you go from we are making out to "it is implied then she wants sex with me"? That was my confusion about your initial statement which I quoted twice. So, I am not understanding how the above diatribe fits into that narrow scenario. I will be the first to admit, this is a tough crime convict on based both on what will always be both state of mind and he said she said. But, to state of mind: "does making out, automatically imply consent to sex?"
> 
> So, to Anon's question what should we be teaching our sons about what consent should mean?


Making out is a definite signal of "I am attracted to you and MAY be open to escalation." If it does not mean this to women, or it does not always mean this to women, then I suggest they say 'no' a bit more to making out unless they mean this particular signal.

At that point, the girl being made out with is the only actor who *knows* where her boundaries are.

I am sure, if you probed, that there are more than a few women who were frustrated that some guy did NOT press his suit more firmly...but probably more who felt his suit far too well, thank you very much!

So sorry...the only reliable navigator though this sexual minefield is the woman.


----------



## Ripper

This is such a vitriolic issue because: 
1)we don't really know what is going on due to conflicting data and political agendas. 
2)both genders feel victimized, one by "rape cultural" the other by "rape cultural hysteria".

The FBI with their all knowing UCR (Uniformed Crime Report) lists Rape in its "refined definition" as 37.9/100,000. That is a .0379%. (if my math is right) Still too much and yes, I realized that is just reported cases.
FBI — Table 19

But if it isn't reported what can anyone do about it?
Rape Is Grossly Underreported In The U.S., Study Finds

Then we have the 1 in 5 statistic being thrown around from a CDC survey. That doesn't sound plausible to me, but if its true, it is horrifying. So I did some research by the what I believe to be neutral sources. In a nutshell, we don't know. For some people the sample was too small and the wording susceptible to manipulation. For others, its gospel.
What Counts As Rape in the CDC's Survey? - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Campus Sexual Assault Statistics: IWF Christina Hoff Sommers
Do the math: rape stats don't add up - Baltimore Sun
No, 1 in 5 women have not been raped on college campuses | WashingtonExaminer.com

Then you have false rape accusations. Any where from 2% of all rapes reported according to feminists to 40% from MRAs. Again, no one knows.
False rape accusations: Why must we pretend they never happen?
How Many Rape Reports Are False? - Bloomberg View

Then we have prison rape that is largely ignored.
Prison Rape Widely Ignored by Authorities - ABC News

Unequal punishment for female offenders.
Men Sentenced To Longer Prison Terms Than Women For Same Crimes, Study Says

And now some state governments are getting involved. Regardless if you agree with the law or not, getting big G involved is never a good thing.
California SB 967 makes 'affirmative consent' law - CNN.com

All in all, a gigantic sh*t sandwich that unfortunately is being served up for the future generation.

TL;DR version: I don't know what the answer is, I believe, at this point, we are completely f*cked.


----------



## Ikaika

JCD said:


> Making out is a definite signal of "I am attracted to you and MAY be open to escalation." If it does not mean this to women, or it does not always mean this to women, then I suggest they say 'no' a bit more to making out unless they mean this particular signal.
> 
> 
> 
> At that point, the girl being made out with is the only actor who *knows* where her boundaries are.
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure, if you probed, that there are more than a few women who were frustrated that some guy did NOT press his suit more firmly...but probably more who felt his suit far too well, thank you very much!
> 
> 
> 
> So sorry...the only reliable navigator though this sexual minefield is the woman.



So I don't get an answer... Does making out imply consent?


----------



## chaos

> Anon Pink said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now chaos, I was nice to you. And I'm going to continue to be nice to you. So nice in fact, I'm going to give you a free lesson in speech and word usage. Yes I know I'm extremely kind.
> 
> 
> My issue with you? Does this mean you hate hate me due to this issue you have with me? And is this me personally or the ideas I've put forth in this thread?
> 
> Might I suggest you try different words to express yourself? Instead of '"my issue with you" it probably would have sounded much less personally offensive if you had said, "my issue with this" or "my issue with that idea..."
> 
> 
> 
> You are right. I should have used different wording that would been more descriptive such as "The issue I have with your title is..." For that I apologize.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because if you had taken the trouble to read MY posts, you would have read the conflict I have with using that word to apply to my experience. The trouble is, I have no better word to convey what happened, how it felt and the consequences I suffered as a result.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry what happened to you but wouldn't sexual molestation and disrespect been better terms to use?
> 
> Reading 40 something pages and keeping track of who said what to whom is a daunting task. My posts originated close to the 40 page mark and had mostly to do with the title of the thread and some of the other member's posts. Was I wrong to do that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Secondly, rape is not always violent. In fact most rapes are NOT violent. Wanna know why? Most men can easily over power a woman. They don't HAVE to beat the **** out of us in order to over power us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Violence is defined as the exercise or an instance of physical force, usually effecting or intended to effect injuries, destruction, etc
> 
> It doesn't matter the amount of force that is/was used, over powering a person, man or woman, against his/her consent, IS a violent act.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And lastly, not once, NOT ONCE has anyone in this thread even come to close to suggesting all men are potential rapists. The title of this thread was a lay on another thread that asked about teaching women to avoid rape. Well, the easiest way to avoid rape is to teach your sons not to do that. Make sense?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So is the title of this thread is a facetious one?
Click to expand...


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Well thank you buddy, that was a very nice thing to say and I appreciate it. Because it is very hard to discuss things such as this without huge disconnects in meaning and considering the history of some women participating, not to mention how men might feel they're being branded unfairly...it's hard to keep things civil.
> 
> "*The female knows that she feels forced.
> 
> So, why is it up to the person that can only guess to act?*"
> 
> Okay. Ask yourself what is happening that makes her feel forced? Is SHE doing something or is HE doing something? Who is doing the something that is causing the feeling?


But that's the point! Her reaction is an unknowable! Now you not only want the man to guess HOW she is feeling (a losing proposition at best) now you ALSO want him to figure out WHY she is feeling this way!

This is squarely throwing the mind reading burden on the man instead of a girl actually saying "I am uncomfortable." Three little words. This is too much for a woman? That is not 'owning your sexuality'.

I am indulging in a sex act. Little things might escape my notice: phones...interlopers...zombie apocalypse...so yeah, I might miss a subtle physical cue or two...

Instead, you seem to be shoving all this responsibility on the man. And we can't know what she is thinking.


----------



## JCD

Cletus said:


> And we're not the only ones talking about this. In today's Times:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/05/us/string-of-sexual-assault-cases-may-lead-to-tipping-point.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
> 
> "“The fix that I’d like to see,” said Erin Buzuvis, the director of the Center for Gender and Sexuality Studies at the Western New England University School of Law, “and one that is relevant whether we are talking about Cosby or the military or UVA. is to cultivate as individuals and society intolerance to the ways violence against women is normalized in the media, through sports, on TV and in movies, in video games, in advertising and online.”


I have said this before, and I will say it again:

The media has a lot to blame for how white women view their safety.

Look at CSI, NCIS, Law and Order (any) etc. Because they want to 'sex things up', the victim is generally a white woman in her 20s.

Would you like to know the SMALLEST murder demographic? Guesses? Anyone?

Consider this: Everyone knows who Natalie Halloway is. Care to guess how many black women were kidnapped in that same time period? How many white men were murdered?

We don't make a big stink about when it happens to a 20 something guy. When it happens to a single perky co-ed, every media dog bays it to the heavens.

So...there is one reason, even despite the 30% drop in rapes, that women feel less safe.


----------



## JCD

Ikaika said:


> So I don't get an answer... Does making out imply consent?


You have already strongly stated that you DON'T think that making out implies consent.

So what is the point of telling you you are wrong...when it is NOT a black and white scenario.

In some cases, the consent is not only implied, it is eagerly GIVEN...but not verbally.

In some cases, even the making out is mentally grudging at best. Again, this is not communicated.

Very few juries (outside of California) are going to listen to a girl saying "yeah, we were French kissing for an hour, but then he grabbed my boob. That is WAY out of line!" and not give her a


----------



## JCD

that.girl said:


> Are you saying it's not worth teaching them because they won't remember anyway?
> Some won't. Some will. I think it's worth a shot. If we don't tell them, they DEFINITELY won't know.
> 
> It's our job as parents to give them the tools. It's up to them to use them. BOTH sexes.


IIRC, that first time for a girl...it generally involves a touch of pain. So if the guy pulls back from a wince...

YOU brought up the subject of the first time. So using your metric (slightly facetiously) NO woman will ever be deflowered unless she does it herself because he 'poked somewhere sensitive and she closed her eyes' so he stopped.

This really is meant tongue in cheek.


----------



## Ikaika

JCD said:


> You have already strongly stated that you DON'T think that making out implies consent.
> 
> 
> 
> So what is the point of telling you you are wrong...when it is NOT a black and white scenario.
> 
> 
> 
> In some cases, the consent is not only implied, it is eagerly GIVEN...but not verbally.
> 
> 
> 
> In some cases, even the making out is mentally grudging at best. Again, this is not communicated.
> 
> 
> 
> Very few juries (outside of California) are going to listen to a girl saying "yeah, we were French kissing for an hour, but then he grabbed my boob. That is WAY out of line!" and not give her a



So I'm wrong but yet you stated it is not black and white. You gave situations based upon when you assume it is implied consent. Would there be situations in which it is not implied consent? And if so what would be those circumstances? 

I used the term disagree, because I think the situation is a bit more complex. I guess I would prefer to err on the side of caution and not expect my sons to be mind readers.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> I get that feeling. I honestly do. Back in my single days drunken hook ups were something men pursued and the wise woman didn't get drunk without a wingman to look out for her. It was clearly a situation of supplier beware. The drunk chick was the low hanging fruit, easy pickings. On a few occasions I lost all respect for the guys in my circle who went after the drunken hook ups and instead helped the girl out by protecting her.
> 
> Drunk couples don't think. Very true.
> 
> I just watched Austin Powers the other day with my daughter. There was a scene in which the woman is drunk and strongly coming on to him. But he made it very clear, he didn't do drunk women.
> 
> *What do you think about that? About making a personal rule that unless you have a marriage or prior sexual relationship you don't do drunk women?*
> 
> Because men don't usually get fvcked just because they've had too much to drink. I know now one wants to call it rape so I changed the word. How many men in this thread have gotten drunk and had a woman take advantage of that?
> 
> Now how many women in this thread have gotten drunk and had a man take advantage of it *and indicated a 'no'*?


First bolded is what I taught my son.

I think that this second bolded part is very important.

It takes this from a very gray and fuzzy 'mind reading' area to rape. THAT is the distinction that men are asking for. Two letters. But instead, I should be reading books on non verbal communication and am a dunce if I miss a clue.

Two letters.


----------



## EleGirl

JCD said:


> Making out is a definite signal of "I am attracted to you and MAY be open to escalation." If it does not mean this to women, or it does not always mean this to women, then I suggest they say 'no' a bit more to making out unless they mean this particular signal.
> 
> At that point, the girl being made out with is the only actor who *knows* where her boundaries are.


And the women here are saying that woman and man need to talk about their boundaries and what they want. 

I am astonished that adults who are more than willing to get naked and have sex together are too skittish to actually talk about it like grown ups.



JCD said:


> I am sure, if you probed, that there are more than a few women who were frustrated that some guy did NOT press his suit more firmly...but probably more who felt his suit far too well, thank you very much!
> 
> So sorry...the only reliable navigator though this sexual minefield is the woman.


So men have no voice, cannot talk about it with a woman.. men are victims.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> I am astonished that adults who are more than willing to get naked and have sex together are too skittish to actually talk about it like grown ups.


The topic of the thread is what to teach our sons, who are very likely neither adults nor experienced nor excellent communicators when having sex, certainly not immediately.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> The topic of the thread is what to teach our sons, who are very likely neither adults nor experienced nor excellent communicators when having sex, certainly not immediately.


You are right.. this thread is about our sons (and their sexual interactions with our daughters). My reply was to a post that was geared more to adults.

However, the point is that we need to teach are boys and our girls that when they become sexually involved they need to talk to each other, talk about consent and boundaries.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Did you seriously just equate what happened to me with you having to work over Christmas?
> 
> Look badger boy, I make a lot of allowances for someone making a point in a heated manner, so I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were attempting humor and had no idea just how flat it would fall.
> 
> MMMkay hon?


Let me walk back a bit.

I _thought_ you were talking about 'feeling forced' as a guy is putting pressure on a girl to put out in a social context. "If you don't, I'm going to dump you" kind of thing.

And while no one likes to be forced, IN THAT CONTEXT, I have not a lot of sympathy.

Let me toss you a male list:

"I think we need to move in together."

"Where is my ring?" (My sister pulled this on her husband)

"We should buy a house."

"We should have a baby."

"I think I need a new car."

"You should quit your job."

These are all profound relationship decisions that women have absolutely no issue bringing up or putting pressure on their partner to accomplish, will he or nil he.

So that is part of grown up life.

THAT is what I was talking about.

Blackmail or physical force is not consistent with fair play (though cutting a guy off is somehow not considered blackmail by some women...odd that...)

I don't know what story you are talking about. I don't follow every single one of your posts. The only one I know about is that groping incident.

That being said, you just took 'some guys' to task about taking the title of this thread personally. I am discussing principles as well, not whatever happened to you. I am not minimizing what happened to you. I don't know it.

I am dealing with the idea that 'this is something I don't like but someone is forcing me to do something I will not like.' That is life. No, it's not happy happy joy joy. This is not utopia.


----------



## JCD

EleGirl said:


> So men have no voice, cannot talk about it with a woman.. men are victims.


Just a bit of a tangent, but let's be clear here. Women have, in general, taken the 'we are the communicating gender' thing and made it into a stereotype. Much is made by women about this fact...usually in the context of dissing mens inability to speak.

AND YET, women now seem reluctant to say two letters...or even three, in a very vulnerable and intimate activity.

Men can talk about it. IF they don't think it's weird. IF the woman does not think it's weird. IF it will not kill the mood. And frankly, guys probably do not want a woman carefully analyzing exactly how far they want to go. They might not like the answer. So to a certain extent, ambiguity is their friend...but not legally. 

For the men, talking about it runs a lot of downsides...and frankly, yet again, *it is not our frigging boundary* we are talking about. YOUR boundary. Own it. Talk about it. Don't ask me to speculate about the existence of something I don't even know you have.

It is like a peanut allergy. It is irrelevant until it becomes important. And the person whom it is important to is the person who has the allergy.


----------



## EleGirl

JCD said:


> Just a bit of a tangent, but let's be clear here. Women have, in general, taken the 'we are the communicating gender' thing and made it into a stereotype. Much is made by women about this fact...usually in the context of dissing mens inability to speak.


Oh good grief.. women dismiss, women make.. yada yada… I have books on social issues going back to the 1830’s in which men wrote about what they put forth as FACT that women were better communicators and men were not, men were silent and strong. Women did not make this up and then push on the poor, victim male gender.


JCD said:


> AND YET, women now seem reluctant to say two letters...or even three, in a very vulnerable and intimate activity.


NOT ONE WOMAN HERE has said that she is reluctant to use the word “NO”. Every woman has said that they have no problem using it, they use it and women need to use it. 

I’ve certainly never had an issue using the word “NO”, and “STOP”, and “get away from me.” Etc. 

I have no clue what you are talking about. This is just one more of your ignoring what women are saying and what women do.



JCD said:


> Men can talk about it. IF they don't think it's weird. IF the woman does not think it's weird. IF it will not kill the mood. And frankly, guys probably do not want a woman carefully analyzing exactly how far they want to go. They might not like the answer. So to a certain extent, ambiguity is their friend...but not legally.


So this is your reason, your excuse for men?

Ah, so men don’t want to discuss boundaries, intentions, desires because then they well have to actually be honest to the woman? And they will actually have to pay attention to her boundaries. Now I get it.

My answer to that is that any guy who is not honest enough, forthright enough to discuss these things before our relationship turns sexual can go fly a kite. No woman needs a manipulative man in her life. I hope that all women are strong enough to kick this kind of guy to the curb.



JCD said:


> For the men, talking about it runs a lot of downsides...and frankly, yet again, *it is not our frigging boundary* we are talking about. YOUR boundary. Own it. Talk about it. Don't ask me to speculate about the existence of something I don't even know you have.


LOL.. you just said that men don’t want to talk about the woman’s boundaries. But now you say that women have to talk about their boundaries to a man she is or will be sexual with. LOL… make up your mind.
No one is asking you to speculate. We are saying that men need to take “No” as “No” and men need to talk, ask, communicate can actually pay attention to a woman he’s with. Novel idea, that!!!



JCD said:


> It is like a peanut allergy. It is irrelevant until it becomes important. And the person whom it is important to is the person who has the allergy.


The above analogy assumes that he other actor is pollen… an external, non-human source.

In a relationship between a man and a woman, there are two humans who need to communicate, and pay attention to each other. 

Basically what you are saying is that the man could care less about the woman. His only interest is getting sex and getting his own satisfaction. Women need to avoid men who are like this. There is no better way to weed them out than to talk to them about these topics.


----------



## JCD

Every woman has said that they have no problem saying 'no'.

A good many of them also are pretty direct that a man should 'just know' when she is or is not into whatever. Men pointing out this is rather close to mind reading are told that the man is responsible for the feelings of the girl. HE needs to talk. HE needs to check (constantly).

This seems a little backwards. If my partner does something I don't like, I tell them. If my partner hurts my feelings I tell them. Sometimes she guesses right. Frequently, she does not. I don't ding her for that. I own that MY feelings, needs and desires are MINE.

So if I want to change her behavior, it is incumbent on me to tell HER.

This is 'owning your feelings' and 'effective communication'.

Now, I get that many men do not try to engage in such discussions before hand. They are not comfortable with that. Heck, if women are any gauge, they aren't either.

But insisting that it is incumbent on the men to 'get the wave off' early and often is definite 'burden shifting'.


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> First bolded is what I taught my son.
> 
> I think that this second bolded part is very important.
> 
> It takes this from a very gray and fuzzy 'mind reading' area to rape. THAT is the distinction that men are asking for. Two letters. But instead, I should be reading books on non verbal communication and am a dunce if I miss a clue.
> 
> Two letters.


Change the TWO letters to 3 words. Is. This. Okay.

I really don't get the push back on consent. If you want to drive the action, YOU need to get consent. If you are uncomfortable with consent. Don't. Drive. The. Action!

Again, I'm talking about your sons and my daughters. You get your sons to require consent and I'll get my daughters to be able to OWN their decisions.





JCD said:


> Let me walk back a bit.
> 
> I _thought_ you were talking about 'feeling forced' as a guy is putting pressure on a girl to put out in a social context. "If you don't, I'm going to dump you" kind of thing.
> 
> And while no one likes to be forced, IN THAT CONTEXT, I have not a lot of sympathy.
> 
> Let me toss you a male list:
> 
> "I think we need to move in together."
> 
> "Where is my ring?" (My sister pulled this on her husband)
> 
> "We should buy a house."
> 
> "We should have a baby."
> 
> "I think I need a new car."
> 
> "You should quit your job."
> 
> These are all profound relationship decisions that women have absolutely no issue bringing up or putting pressure on their partner to accomplish, will he or nil he.
> 
> So that is part of grown up life.
> 
> THAT is what I was talking about.
> 
> Blackmail or physical force is not consistent with fair play (though cutting a guy off is somehow not considered blackmail by some women...odd that...)
> 
> I don't know what story you are talking about. I don't follow every single one of your posts. The only one I know about is that groping incident.
> 
> That being said, you just took 'some guys' to task about taking the title of this thread personally. I am discussing principles as well, not whatever happened to you. I am not minimizing what happened to you. I don't know it.
> 
> I am dealing with the idea that 'this is something I don't like but someone is forcing me to do something I will not like.' That is life. No, it's not happy happy joy joy. This is not utopia.



You equate what happened to me or to EleGirl, or to NobodySpecial or that.girl or any of the other women who came out and talked about their experiences with a wife bugging her husband for a new car?

I know you are not the complete d!ck head you are showing yourself to be in this thread. You've latched onto a topic and you won't let go.

You said you wanted to step back. I urge you to do so. I urge you to think for a moment what it's like to be forcibly penetrated. Bad enough. Now think for a moment what it's like to be beaten up as you're being forcibly penetrated. Now, contemplate when it's over, you have to find you clothes and put them back on, find some help, get away.

This thread was NEVER about lumping all men into rapist category. It was about helping the younger generation be more aware of both their rights as sexual beings to have sex, and their responsibilities as sexual being to ensure that there are no murky experiences. The only way to do that is to teach required consent! 

Rape is far too varied an experience to require a no. Yet no matter the kind of experience it is, the after effects are pretty damn similar for every woman.


I deleted my disclosing posts last night. I wasn't comfortable leaving them up.


----------



## chaos

Keep it up folks and don't be surprised if the mods swoop down from the skies raining fire and brimstone to close this thread for good.


----------



## ConanHub

I think some men are reacting poorly to the title. The subject matter is good and worthwhile. There are some who are really posting very ignorant and insensitive statements. Possibly to get it closed.

I am a man not offended by APs or any other women's tones or comments here. Some of these fellows seem very insecure to me.

Maybe having witnessed and experienced rape growing up gave me more insight.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

This has been a very good thread.

A good percentage of the people who posted there have been open to actually addressing the idea presented. 

Some good ideas and exchanges have occurred. 

The rest is just the typical noise.


----------



## Anon Pink

ConanHub said:


> I think some men are reacting poorly to the title. The subject matter is good and worthwhile. There are some who are really posting very ignorant and insensitive statements. Possibly to get it closed.
> 
> I am a man not offended by APs or any other women's tones or comments here. Some of these fellows seem very insecure to me.
> 
> Maybe having witnessed and experienced rape growing up gave me more insight.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It clearly did Conan. You're a good man! I'm sorry you had to go through so much but it clearly made you one strong assed MFer!


----------



## ConanHub

Anon Pink said:


> It clearly did Conan. You're a good man! I'm sorry you had to go through so much but it clearly made you one strong assed MFer!


Flattery will get you everywhere!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

Anon Pink said:


> It clearly did Conan. You're a good man! I'm sorry you had to go through so much but it clearly made you one strong assed MFer!


:iagree:


----------



## Faithful Wife

Anon Pink said:


> I urge you to do so. I urge you to think for a moment what it's like to be forcibly penetrated. Bad enough. Now think for a moment what it's like to be beaten up as you're being forcibly penetrated. Now, contemplate when it's over, you have to find you clothes and put them back on, find some help, get away.


I just don't think some people who haven't experienced anything similar can imagine it or empathize, Anon. Honestly. There is no frame of reference for many people and they just don't see what the big deal is or why they should have to try to imagine being raped and go through that mental exercise. I'm not saying most people, but many (and obviously a few on this thread).


----------



## Faithful Wife

ConanHub said:


> Maybe having witnessed and experienced rape growing up gave me more insight.


Most certainly. I don't think it is possible to really imagine it if it hasn't been experienced. So for those who have not, they cannot truly empathize. But most people do try of course, and most people who haven't experienced rape find it abhorrent and dispicable and don't even want to try to imagine it. Yet others, they kind of act like "meh, really? is it really that bad?" Those are the ones who just can't imagine it and therefore won't ever "get it" no matter how many people come forth with their stories.


----------



## Faithful Wife

EleGirl said:


> This has been a very good thread.
> 
> A good percentage of the people who posted there have been open to actually addressing the idea presented.
> 
> Some good ideas and exchanges have occurred.
> 
> The rest is just the typical noise.


Ele, you and Anon are rockstars! :smthumbup:


----------



## Personal

JCD said:


> How many of you women in your teen and twenties reached out and kissed a guy first?


Both my wife (when we were in our twenties) and my ex wife (when we were in our teens) kissed me first and subsequently offered sex first as well despite the fact that they had never pursued a man before.

As has been my experience with lots of other women, since most initiated and or offered first. Just like I was always asked to the school dance by one girl or another or was asked to go steady by other teens same age, younger and or older while I was in High School.

Women reach out all of the time even if they haven't done it before if someone grabs there interest in that special way.



JCD said:


> It is not so much that the burden is unfair, it is that the potential punishments of guessing consent wrong (with these uncommunicative women) is so bloody high!
> 
> Example: I go in for a feel.
> 
> Guess correctly: get a feel.
> 
> Guess Incorrectly: Scream! (to gaggle of girlfriends) "Do you know, that guy is SUCH a sexual assaulter", "I don't want to see you any more. How COULD you?"
> 
> Is it any wonder why guys might consider a a beer or some X box as a bit of more...mmm....trustworthy bit of pleasure.


Does it really happen like that? I've gone down there on occasion and have had my hand returned from whence it came, with no screaming and no drama.

Yet I got the message without it being any ambiguity. On the other hand if I kept pressing despite the message and took what wasn't offered, I have no doubt I would be committing a crime.



JCD said:


> First bolded is what I taught my son.
> 
> I think that this second bolded part is very important.
> 
> It takes this from a very gray and fuzzy 'mind reading' area to rape. THAT is the distinction that men are asking for. Two letters. But instead, I should be reading books on non verbal communication and am a dunce if I miss a clue.
> 
> Two letters.


What's wrong with wanting three sexy enthusiastic letters before pressing on. Yes is certainly sexy doesn't kill the mood and leaves no doubt. That said, if the answer is no that so called mood wasn't really their to begin with.

Women and men need to stop presuming and guessing what the other wants. Good communication is sexy, men and women are human so lets stop thinking we're all some sort of different stereotype.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

NobodySpecial said:


> I cannot imagine what you read in my post that yields this response. SadSam said he would prefer they abstain. I asked why. He answered. I shared my view. Which you disagree with. Then flipped out all over me.
> 
> You can't be talking to me. I don't even know what this slvt shaming business is.


 I did get carried away.. and I apologize for that... I'm not perfect....you did't deserve that... not you personally... it's just that every post on *this thread* is speaking about casual sex....because if a couple really KNEW each other & took the time to build something emotional with each other.... (that yes, I feel we should teach our children *-before having sex*)....they would not have these ridiculous issues, wading through them, the assurance of being ready would be there, no mixed signals. It would have been a time of anticipation before engaging.. 

Anytime someone would ask "Why abstain" ...it just seems to suggest ..."well that's not necessary.. why in the world would we teach our kids that?!"....and many do feel this way. 

Maybe you were just honestly curious to his answer.. I don't know..... but I didn't entertain that thought.. I just ran with it feeling it was another put down to parents who feel differently... 

These threads are *triggering to me* as I very much dislike and frown upon how many young people carry on today in regards to sex...the "hooking up culture" in college ....is everyone OK with this ....really??? .... just seems so to me... this thread is playing into it very much with these responses.. 

Others think the sexual revolution has been a blessing.. I feel many things have been LOST with the gains.. I am very much against sexual repression .... but we seem to forget that every teen is different....if they are more sensitive and truly are looking for love, not just a good time...they need taught all sexual views and why ... not just "put a condom on it"...we need to think about what is best for them... in the long haul..... not what society is doing as a whole.. which today, is causal sex...that's our norm... 

Abstaining is now in the minority view and it now gets looked down upon...


----------



## SimplyAmorous

NobodySpecial said:


> I did not say it was strange. I did not say not to wait for someone special. I simply suggested that there is no real reason to think that young people are going to learn about sex any other way than anything else that they learn, experience. I think that society makes to much of a Big F'ing Deal out of sex. Girls' virginity is a big deal. "Losing" it, like it was some kind of treasure, is a big deal. I can't really see why. Boys see sex as conquest or accomplishment. Honor roll is an accomplishment. These attitudes stifle healthy learning. And when a parent has a don't do it attitude, it makes them less available when the kids have issues or concerns.


Well...I read you correct all along then....you find those who suggest abstaining "Stifling" and against learning to boot......I guess I wasn't crazy in running with my thoughts after all...

Though I disagree with you that others think it's such a big deal these days.. No...this has been lost ...most feel *like you *today..this thread is very evident. And we will continue to reap what we sow.

The tide has turned... I've sat down & talked with some teens & how difficult it is today for them -because they are not having sex -like everyone else... they get taunted, ridiculed.. and we live in a smaller town even, not a big city where virtually that's the norm. It's not such a joy ride on this side either. 

What type of role models do we want for our girls today....the Kim Kardashians?


----------



## that.girl

EleGirl said:


> Basically what you are saying is that the man could care less about the woman. His only interest is getting sex and getting his own satisfaction. Women need to avoid men who are like this. There is no better way to weed them out than to talk to them about these topics.


This has left me with an interesting thought -
some guys just don't get what we're trying to say here. They can't identify with it.
So maybe mothers, who better understand the female mind, should be having the consent talk with our sons and daughters. Teach them both to talk about boundaries with their partners, and to demand that their partners be willing to have that discussion. 

Those (male and female) who are willing to talk with their dates will be rewarded, so to speak. And the ones who think it's a "boner killer" will adjust their behavior or go home alone.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SimplyAmorous said:


> I did get carried away.. and I apologize for that... I'm not perfect....you did't deserve that... not you personally... it's just that every post on *this thread* is speaking about casual sex....because if a couple really KNEW each other & took the time to build something emotional with each other.... (that yes, I feel we should teach our children *-before having sex*)....they would not have these ridiculous issues, wading through them, the assurance of being ready would be there, no mixed signals. It would have been a time of anticipation before engaging..
> 
> Anytime someone would ask "Why abstain" ...it just seems to suggest ..."well that's not necessary.. why in the world would we teach our kids that?!"....and many do feel this way.


I'm sorry, but if you want to infer things that I did not write, that is on you. I can say that I don't appreciate it.


----------



## Shoto1984

Anon Pink said:


> In that case it would behoove you men to actually READ the opening post.
> 
> Why is that we can't talk about rape with at least a few men feeling attacked? I purposely made this thread about our children so that the men wouldn't feel attacked...and it still happened!
> 
> So how do we have this conversation? What words should I use or not use?


I think most of us men did read both the title and the content of the first post. And the result was many of us feeling a blanket insinuation against males. So you might not like that result but that's the cake you baked. We see "sons" and we equate that to "males" perhaps. Or we see "sons" and think I was a "son" and I've never did anything like that nor anyone who is/was a "son" that I know and I didn't need any special teaching so what is she talking about.....

It also seemed that we pretty quickly got into a very typical male/female communication and problem solving contrast. Men generally (not all) want to identify the problem, create a solution and move on. Women generally (not all) want to embrace a problem and hang on to it.

I don't know.... It sounds like some male/men went into the Ladies Lounge and said somethings that offended some ladies and so a plan was hatched to come into the Man Cave and do the same. That's the feeling I get anyway...(having my words twisted to suit an aggressive agenda and suggesting that I'd be ok watching my daughters be groped/raped is about the worst thing I've ever seen on TAM)


----------



## Shoto1984

JCD said:


> This is not so much about hypersexualization. That is a different topic, IMO.
> 
> This is about women assume, and even demand, that men be sexual aggressors AND YET also wish to keep a hair trigger and very low bar to consent and sexual assault.
> 
> In some ways, (sorry ladies) they want total control of the entire situation. And yet they do not see this 'my way or the highway...excuse me, jail' attitude as being a 'gatekeeper'.
> 
> The person who can say 'no' is the person in control. Look at mom/dad vs. kids. I do not know that women always use that power wisely.
> 
> That being said: this is the perspective on the outside looking in!
> 
> A woman will read this and say "ARE YOU FRIGGING CRAZY! If I don't 'put out' when he wants sex, now I'm in the dog house! I might get dumped, even if I think he's special and I'm not ready. I can't help how I feel about sex and this 'three dates and done' rule is VERY UNCOMFORTABLE because three days...hell, I'll barely learn his middle name, much less know if he's a good man."
> 
> There is relentless pressure on both sides and it darned well FEELS unfair on both sides, I'm sure.
> 
> Not sure if this is germane, but it does relate to 'consent'


Agree JCD. Complex issues with the landscape changing all the time.


----------



## NobodySpecial

that.girl said:


> This has left me with an interesting thought -
> some guys just don't get what we're trying to say here. They can't identify with it.
> So maybe mothers, who better understand the female mind, should be having the consent talk with our sons and daughters. Teach them both to talk about boundaries with their partners, and to demand that their partners be willing to have that discussion.
> 
> Those (male and female) who are willing to talk with their dates will be rewarded, so to speak. And the ones who think it's a "boner killer" will adjust their behavior or go home alone.


The thing that gets me about this thread is the notion that gender relations and healthy relationships don't need to be taught. My assailants were not some kind of aberrant mutants but regular dudes.


----------



## that.girl

NobodySpecial said:


> The thing that gets me about this thread is the notion that gender relations and healthy relationships don't need to be taught. My assailants were not some kind of aberrant mutants but regular dudes.


I agree. The thing that gets me about this thread is the resistance to a 15 minute conversation with your kids that can lead to healthier relationships and prevent undeserved criminal charges. 

But i think a lot of the problem is in posters misunderstanding each others comments or taking them to extreme circumstances. We left "rational discussion" 20 pages ago, now we're all just venting and throwing around our emotional baggage.


----------



## Shoto1984

NobodySpecial said:


> The thing that gets me about this thread is the notion that gender relations and healthy relationships don't need to be taught. My assailants were not some kind of aberrant mutants but regular dudes.


I think the fact that they assaulted you says they were not regular dudes. The may have looked "regular" but someplace inside them they are outliers and not representative of the general male population (at least not yet....)


----------



## NobodySpecial

Shoto1984 said:


> I think the fact that they assaulted you says they were not regular dudes. The may have looked "regular" but someplace inside them they are outliers and not representative of the general male population (at least not yet....)


I guess, as a Mom, I want to make sure that I am raising my kids to be normal dudes.


----------



## Cletus

Anon Pink said:


> What happened? How did you feel about it? How did you handle it?


That would constitute a thread jack. My advice to my sons would be to stop partying before you've lost your wits unless you want to wake up to one really big WTF?


----------



## coffee4me

Cletus said:


> That would constitute a thread jack. My advice to my sons would be to stop partying before you've lost your wits unless you want to wake up to one really big WTF?


Good advice! I give that advice to my son and my daughter.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
Maybe the idea of what is and isn't legitimate "pressure" is worth discussing.

I think that pressure that does not threaten harmful or illegal action is not rape, or anything like it.

For example, "if you don't have sex with me, I will break up with you" maybe rude, but I don't see it as at all rapey. 

This is different, from "if you don't have sex with me, I'm going to kick you out of my car on a lonely road miles from town" (which is a threat of some physical harm.


Withing reason, escalating sexual touching is OK, unless there is some indication of non consent. Whether or not you can do so again is tricky - you need to figure out whether your partner was not consenting at that particular instant, for the evening, or forever. This is why communication is so important. 

This gets tricky. Imagine a couple kissing. The guy puts his hand on the woman's breast and she pushes it away, but keeps kissing him. Clearly she is consenting to kissing. Can he try to touch her breast again that evening? Ever? It sort of depends on *how* she pushed him away. 

Stopping all sexual activity is clear. Things can get tricky when someone wants to stop some, but not all activity and some but not all times.


----------



## always_alone

I haven't read all of the posts here, so my apologies if this has already been said, but it strikes me that one approach that might be useful is to teach kids to be more aware of other people, especially their sex partners.

Most of the resistance and complaints have been things like "you expect men to be mind readers", "I'm so busy getting off I wouldn't notice the zombie apocalypse", "she was sending mixed signals", and so on.

Maybe, just maybe, if sex education involved a lesson on actually paying actual attention to a partner, it would help some people realize that if the person is not moving, they are likely not having a great time, and if you keep getting pushed backwards, then likely you are over-stepping, and that if the other person isn't moving the action along as well, then it likely is a one-way thing.

And that there is no such thing as a "weak" no.


----------



## chaos

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening all
> Maybe the idea of what is and isn't legitimate "pressure" is worth discussing.
> 
> I think that pressure that does not threaten harmful or illegal action is not rape, or anything like it.
> 
> For example, *"if you don't have sex with me, I will break up with you"* maybe rude, but I don't see it as at all rapey.


I beg to differ because it can fall under statutory rape.


----------



## Cletus

There have been a few recent complaints about a cohort of guys who "just don't get it" on this topic. Having had a couple of pointed exchanges way back when this thread was just being born, I want to know into which camp I belong. 

I'm not going to attack anyone for a response, but if I'm part of rape culture in America, whatever that means, I think I want to know that.


----------



## that.girl

Cletus said:


> There have been a few recent complaints about a cohort of guys who "just don't get it" on this topic. Having had a couple of pointed exchanges way back when this thread was just being born, I want to know into which camp I belong.
> 
> I'm not going to attack anyone for a response, but if I'm part of rape culture in America, whatever that means, I think I want to know that.


Personally, I'd put you in the "get it" camp. You may not agree with everything being said, and that's fine. But you seem to understand the importance of knowing your attention is welcomed.


----------



## NobodySpecial

chaos said:


> I beg to differ because it can fall under statutory rape.


Statutory rape is statutory rape. I'll break up with you aint it. I think it would be easier on the men if we did not say everything that isn't rape is.


----------



## ConanHub

Cletus said:


> There have been a few recent complaints about a cohort of guys who "just don't get it" on this topic. Having had a couple of pointed exchanges way back when this thread was just being born, I want to know into which camp I belong.
> 
> I'm not going to attack anyone for a response, but if I'm part of rape culture in America, whatever that means, I think I want to know that.


I think you have been pretty cool Cletus.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub

Shoto1984 said:


> I think the fact that they assaulted you says they were not regular dudes. The may have looked "regular" but someplace inside them they are outliers and not representative of the general male population (at least not yet....)


There are a fairly high number of those types. Some grow out of it and some don't.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon Pink

Shoto1984 said:


> I think most of us men did read both the title and the content of the first post. *And the result was many of us feeling a blanket insinuation against males. * So you might not like that result but that's the cake you baked. We see "sons" and we equate that to "males" perhaps. Or we see "sons" and think I was a "son" and I've never did anything like that nor anyone who is/was a "son" that I know and I _didn't need any special teaching so what is she talking about....._


I am trying to understand how you, or any other man in this thread heard a blanket accusation from my title or opening post. I have read my post several times. I feel like I was pretty clear.

I have to wonder if those being adamant in their push back are those with possible 'murky' experiences in their own past and are defending themselves against having to look at their own history under a different lens [and yes, I understand that statement might be seen as inflammatory. I am not suggesting any man pushing back is a closet rapist!!! But we all have experiences, not even involving sex, in which we look back as adults and can see a new twist on what we thought at the time...hindsight being 20/20 and all...]




> It also seemed that we pretty quickly got into a very typical male/female communication and problem solving contrast. Men generally (not all) want to identify the problem, create a solution and move on. Women generally (not all) want to embrace a problem and hang on to it.


Women do not want to hang onto a problem any more than men. THIS is the problem of perception. If a woman in your life is hanging onto a problem, it is for one of two reasons. 1. She has yet to feel heard and that's on YOU! 2. She is a grudge holder and it has nothing to do with her gender but her character!



> I don't know.... It sounds like some male/men went into the Ladies Lounge and said somethings that offended some ladies and so a plan was hatched to come into the Man Cave and do the same. That's the feeling I get anyway...(having my words twisted to suit an *aggressive agenda* and suggesting that I'd be ok watching my daughters be groped/raped is about the worst thing I've ever seen on TAM)


Aggressive agenda? WTF? I am trying to open a sincere dialogue, as I have stated MANY times in this thread! I am not pushing anything other than a deeper understanding between the sexes. 

I challenge you to repost and quote any statement made by anyone in this thread that suggests you or anyone, male or female, would be okay watching their daughters be groped! 





Anon Pink said:


> According to popular opinion, women need to learn to protect themselves from men who might be rapists. You know, other than general safety stuff, how is a woman supposed to know if a man is a friendly guy or if he is isolating her to overpower and rape her? Is the coach being nice offering her a ride home or is he kidnapping her? Was the hand on my ass a result of the subway car momentum or did that guy just cop a cheap feel? Impossible!
> 
> So what do you parents of sons teach, explain and show your sons about the difference between trying to convince her to have sex with you and coercing her? How many of you have actually told your sons not to cop a cheap feel even if she is passed out? How many of you have actually explained the difference between taking the lead in sexual play and just plain taking?
> 
> What do you tell your sons?


Why do you refuse to hear me? What words did I use that triggered you and made you feel attacked for being a male? How could I have asked this question differently so that I could open this dialogue without triggering you or anyone else into feeling attacked based on being a male?


I'm trying to sincerely understand...


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> There have been a few recent complaints about a cohort of guys who "just don't get it" on this topic. Having had a couple of pointed exchanges way back when this thread was just being born, I want to know into which camp I belong.
> 
> I'm not going to attack anyone for a response, but if I'm part of rape culture in America, whatever that means, I think I want to know that.


Of course not! 

As far as I'm concerned there is only one individual participating in this thread that I would characterize as part of the rape culture and I've already posted that I find him guilty!

Not even the men pushing back would I think as part of the rape culture. I think they are feeling attacked and I'm trying to understand how to discuss this without men feeling attacked because they have a penis, the implement most often used in rape.


----------



## that.girl

Shoto1984 said:


> I think the fact that they assaulted you says they were not regular dudes. The may have looked "regular" but someplace inside them they are outliers and not representative of the general male population (at least not yet....)


This would be true of men who ignore a no. But in many of these murky consent cases, they are nice, normal guys, and they NEVER KNOW IT HAPPENED. 

They think they scored and she was a cold fish, so they never called her back. They have no idea that she went home, threw up, and cried herself to sleep. And they would probably feel horrible if they did know!

That's why this is such a tricky situation. A guy can say "I would never do that!" And genuinely mean it. But maybe he did that and never knew. 

They weren't bad guys. Maybe she wasn't clear, maybe he wasn't paying attention. They lacked the education to understand what was happening.


----------



## NobodySpecial

that.girl said:


> This would be true of men who ignore a no. But in many of these murky consent cases, they are nice, normal guys, and they NEVER KNOW IT HAPPENED.
> 
> They think they scored and she was a cold fish, so they never called her back. They have no idea that she went home, threw up, and cried herself to sleep. And they would probably feel horrible if they did know!
> 
> That's why this is such a tricky situation. A guy can say "I would never do that!" And genuinely mean it. But maybe he did that and never knew.
> 
> They weren't bad guys. Maybe she wasn't clear, maybe he wasn't paying attention. They lacked the education to understand what was happening.



I knew a guy who was convicted of rape in college for performing on a passed out girl. He had no idea that since she did not say no it could still be rape. Personally, I had always thought he was a DB. But what kind of person actually wants to do that?


----------



## that.girl

NobodySpecial said:


> I knew a guy who was convicted of rape in college for performing on a passed out girl. He had no idea that since she did not say no it could still be rape. Personally, I had always thought he was a DB. But what kind of person actually wants to do that?


I don't consider unconsciousness to be murky consent. But some guys really do need to be told that a passed out girl is off limits. Honestly, i think most parents cover that particular issue in "the talk."


----------



## Anon Pink

that.girl said:


> This would be true of men who ignore a no. But in many of these murky consent cases, they are nice, normal guys, and they NEVER KNOW IT HAPPENED.
> 
> They think they scored and she was a cold fish, so they never called her back. They have no idea that she went home, threw up, and cried herself to sleep. And they would probably feel horrible if they did know!
> 
> That's why this is such a tricky situation. A guy can say "I would never do that!" And genuinely mean it. But maybe he did that and never knew.
> 
> They weren't bad guys. Maybe she wasn't clear, maybe he wasn't paying attention. They lacked the education to understand what was happening.


Exactly.


----------



## Ikaika

that.girl said:


> This would be true of men who ignore a no. But in many of these murky consent cases, they are nice, normal guys, and they NEVER KNOW IT HAPPENED.
> 
> 
> 
> They think they scored and she was a cold fish, so they never called her back. They have no idea that she went home, threw up, and cried herself to sleep. And they would probably feel horrible if they did know!
> 
> 
> 
> That's why this is such a tricky situation. A guy can say "I would never do that!" And genuinely mean it. But maybe he did that and never knew.
> 
> 
> 
> They weren't bad guys. Maybe she wasn't clear, maybe he wasn't paying attention. They lacked the education to understand what was happening.



This is what I was trying to figure out from two other male posters on how they assumed making out was somehow implied consent. Although, not being a woman, I could figure out how to express it, this is the situation I would have assumed in my disagreement about making out = implied consent. 

Thank you for the clarification. 

I have to be honest, I think ten years ago I would agreed with a few of the male posters some of the women on this thread have had frustration with. It's easy to look at this situation as purely biological and figure, there are but two underlying meanings to my existence - having sex and having it often (purpose of reproducing) and attaining food (metabolism to sustain my sexual prowess). However humans are complex and we establish culture norms (due to our neocortex). Those culture norms evolve at a faster pace than our biological evolution. So while we are still the hunter/gatherer seeking sex and food we are also a cultural animal. It does require teaching our sons (and daughters, albeit a different message) on the current cultural norms in light of our hunter/gatherer hormonal/hypothalamic urges.


----------



## that.girl

And I'm still not clear on how making out is consent to sex. In my bed, there are usually a few more steps between kissing and penetration. Either he and I are using different definitions for "make out", or i feel sorry for his lady and l wonder how she feels about the complete lack of foreplay.


----------



## MaritimeGuy

It occurs to me that in today's society where an accusation of rape, even if it turns out to be false, can be so damaging isn't it prudent to get clear and unequivocal consent before engaging in sex? 

In my mind any argument that a woman has to put up resistance before escalation to full on sex occurs just isn't getting it. There are a lot of reasons a woman may fail to resist, some of which you may respect others of which you may not. Either way who wants to be party to having taken advantage of a woman in that situation?

There are plenty of women out there more than happy to engage in sex. Why get involved in one that needs to be coerced or at least pretend like she needs to be coerced? Way too dangerous a proposition if you ask me.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> Ok, but do those facts always imply, making out as an implied consent? How does one present state of mind as a defense, when consent can't be given by the defendant? I say again, you are expressing your opinion and welcome to do so.


I'm not really sure what you're asking. The fact I'm presenting, is that juries regularly side with the defendant as having implied consent if the accuser is participating in sexual activity. He is understood to reasonably perceive that she is good to go. 

It's not my opinion, it's the opinion of juries. The fact is that they almost always consider this implied consent if she takes no further action to resist. Doing nothing (freezing up) is not resistance. Resistance is trying to leave, saying no, etc. Without resistance, you can't have force... so you can't have rape.

State of mind is regularly presented in court. Juries are given specific instructions on how to consider it. At issue, is whether a reasonable person would construe her behavior as consent to advance.

You're seem stuck on this idea that consent must be repeatedly given at every step along the way. In addition to being a vague standard (what constitutes a step or advance requiring another consent?), it also virtually eliminates a concept of implied consent, because until you DO something - you don't know that she's ok with it except by what is implied by her previous actions. In effect, you're just demanding express consent. No where in the US does the law require express consent.

Her not revoking the consent she's already implied simply because she's freaked out doesn't fly. Her "freezing up" could be presented by the prosecutor as resistance or withdrawal of consent, but usually, this is not judged as clear enough to convict. That's going to hinge on what the defendant is judged to reasonably believe. "She just layed there during intercourse, but I didn't think anything of it... doesn't the guy usually do the work? She didn't suddenly become stiff as a board. I moved her leg, she let me. I positioned her body, she let me. I didn't force her legs open. She didn't push away, she didn't say anything. She was so into everything a moment earlier, I thought we were fine. Maybe she didn't know what to do."

You made out. He escalated. You didn't object. He has every reason to believe consent remains. This is the nature of the vast majority of sexual encounters, and why men aren't required to ask, "Is this ok? Is that ok? How about this now?"


----------



## that.girl

No one is asking what is prosecutable.

We are asking what is morally right. 

As someone said earlier, you can legally get away with murder if you set it up right. That doesn't make it okay.


----------



## SadSamIAm

Anon Pink said:


> I am trying to understand how you, or any other man in this thread heard a blanket accusation from my title or opening post. I have read my post several times. I feel like I was pretty clear.


How would you feel if someone started a thread called,

"Teach wives not to *****. How?"


Doesn't that sound like I am insinuating that all wives ***** unless we teach them differently?


----------



## chaos

that.girl said:


> No one is asking what is prosecutable.
> 
> We are asking what is morally right.
> 
> As someone said earlier, you can legally get away with murder if you set it up right. That doesn't make it okay.


You are right but if a boy is not taught that was is morally wrong can also have dire criminal consequences for him, then he may not realize the severity of his actions until it's too late


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I'm not really sure what you're asking. The fact I'm presenting, is that juries regularly side with the defendant as having implied consent if the accuser is participating in sexual activity. He is understood to reasonably perceive that she is good to go.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not my opinion, it's the opinion of juries. The fact is that they almost always consider this implied consent if she takes no further action to resist. Doing nothing (freezing up) is not resistance. Resistance is trying to leave, saying no, etc. Without resistance, you can't have force... so you can't have rape.
> 
> 
> 
> State of mind is regularly presented in court. Juries are given specific instructions on how to consider it. At issue, is whether a reasonable person would construe her behavior as consent to advance.
> 
> 
> 
> You're seem stuck on this idea that consent must be repeatedly given at every step along the way. In addition to being a vague standard (what constitutes a step or advance requiring another consent?), it also virtually eliminates a concept of implied consent, because until you DO something - you don't know that she's ok with it except by what is implied by her previous actions. In effect, you're just demanding express consent. No where in the US does the law require express consent.
> 
> 
> 
> Her not revoking the consent she's already implied simply because she's freaked out doesn't fly. Her "freezing up" could be presented by the prosecutor as resistance or withdrawal of consent, but usually, this is not judged as clear enough to convict. That's going to hinge on what the defendant is judged to reasonably believe. "She just layed there during intercourse, but I didn't think anything of it... doesn't the guy usually do the work? She didn't suddenly become stiff as a board. I moved her leg, she let me. I positioned her body, she let me. I didn't force her legs open. She didn't push away, she didn't say anything. She was so into everything a moment earlier, I thought we were fine. Maybe she didn't know what to do."
> 
> 
> 
> You made out. He escalated. You didn't object. He has every reason to believe consent remains. This is the nature of the vast majority of sexual encounters, and why men aren't required to ask, "Is this ok? Is that ok? How about this now?"



I'm not stuck on consent repeated need for consent, I just don't see how one takes making out as consent to sex. It really is as simple as it sounds, so I don't see validity in your diatribe without evidence to your claims which I will continue to assume is your opinion. And, you have a right to such opinions.


----------



## richie33

SadSamIAm said:


> How would you feel if someone started a thread called,
> 
> "Teach wives not to *****. How?"
> 
> 
> Doesn't that sound like I am insinuating that all wives ***** unless we teach them differently?


Wouldn't it be teach daughters not to be .......... How?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MaritimeGuy said:


> It occurs to me that in today's society where an accusation of rape, even if it turns out to be false, can be so damaging isn't it prudent to get clear and unequivocal consent before engaging in sex?


Describe how clear and unequivocal consent is achieved without asking a question. Combine this with the fact that women generally find asking for sex unattractive. Is enthusiastically making out clear and unequivocal consent? How about a BJ? Where is the line exactly where she gets to say, "because I stopped doing anything, I can say you raped me." Because she can withdraw consent at any time, this is an unacceptable standard.



MaritimeGuy said:


> In my mind any argument that a woman has to put up resistance before escalation to full on sex occurs just isn't getting it. There are a lot of reasons a woman may fail to resist, some of which you may respect others of which you may not. Either way who wants to be party to having taken advantage of a woman in that situation?


The law just doesn't get it then. 3 essential legal elements of rape: 1) penetration, 2) consent, 3) force. Force must be proven and force doesn't exist without resistance.

I'm sure no decent man wants to take advantage of a woman. The question is: on what basis does he have to believe that he is taking? Her doing nothing is ambiguously insufficient. Remember, they can withdraw consent at any time. So the moment they stop doing anything... you're suddenly raping them? That's an absurd standard.



MaritimeGuy said:


> There are plenty of women out there more than happy to engage in sex. Why get involved in one that needs to be coerced or at least pretend like she needs to be coerced? Way too dangerous a proposition if you ask me.


Coercion: the practice of *forcing* another party to act in an involuntary manner by use of intimidation or threats or some other form of pressure or force.

No one is condoning coercion - force, intimidation, threat, or pressure. Persuasion is coercion. Nibbling on her ear may be persuasive, but it is not coercive. On the basis of her current sexual activity, it may be entirely reasonable to believe that she "was more than happy to engage in sex" even though she later freezes (that's what implied consent IS).


----------



## Anon Pink

SadSamIAm said:


> How would you feel if someone started a thread called,
> 
> "Teach wives not to *****. How?"
> 
> 
> Doesn't that sound like I am insinuating that all wives ***** unless we teach them differently?


Assuming the *** blanks out the B word....

If I saw that title I would assume the guy had a problem solving problems with his wife and doesn't know how to make her feel heard. I would not jump to the conclusion that I was being called b!tchy just because his wife was b!tchy.

Secondly, I have been called a b!tch by many many people, men, women and even my own kids. So get in line dude!


----------



## Ikaika

To go on with both moral and legal implications, I think the following is important to consider and my trouble with the notion of implied consent.

_There’s more to determining whether a sexual encounter is consensual than the word “no,” he said, even if a word isn’t spoken. "Silence is not consent,”..._. Source: Star News(Wilmington, NC) June 26, 2005, Sunday. When ‘No’ is not Enough / Lack of Evidence can Make ‘Date’ Rape Difficult to Prove. By John DeSantis, Staff Writer

I believe this is an important conversation to have and by no means do I believe my opinions on the matter are completely right or wrong. But, we should be careful to cast aspersions on another's opinion and I apologize if I have done so. I am simply trying to understand the extent of the topic. Some parts are easy to decipher, others not so much.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> How would you feel if someone started a thread called,
> 
> "Teach wives not to *****. How?"
> 
> 
> Doesn't that sound like I am insinuating that all wives ***** unless we teach them differently?


We are not talking about teaching already grown people. Maybe the title should have said how to raise boys into men who?


----------



## SadSamIAm

that.girl said:


> I agree. The thing that gets me about this thread is the resistance to a 15 minute conversation with your kids that can lead to healthier relationships and prevent undeserved criminal charges.
> 
> But i think a lot of the problem is in posters misunderstanding each others comments or taking them to extreme circumstances. We left "rational discussion" 20 pages ago, now we're all just venting and throwing around our emotional baggage.


Most people think that they don't need this 15 minute conversation because they have already spent considerable time showing and teaching their children how to act responsibly. 

The thread should have been called "Teach sons not to be too sexual with their girlfriends if they aren't sure they are into it."

Using the word rape is too strong for what the discussion has ended up being.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> Most people think that they don't need this 15 minute conversation because they have already spent considerable time showing and teaching their children how to act responsibly.
> 
> The thread should have been called "Teach sons not to be too sexual with their girlfriends if they aren't sure they are into it."
> 
> Using the word rape is too strong for what the discussion has ended up being.


My assailants thought of themselves as regular people with regular parents doing nothing wrong. So how can this be?


----------



## EleGirl

chaos said:


> You are right but if a boy is not taught that was is morally wrong can also have dire criminal consequences for him, then he may not realize the severity of his actions until it's too late


Isn't that the point of this thread? Boys and girls need to be taught these things.


----------



## EleGirl

richie33 said:


> Wouldn't it be teach daughters not to be .......... How?


One of the male TAM members started a thread in the Lady's Lounge forum entitles "Rape Avoidance Tactics. Discuss". He posted it because he seems to believe that women have no clue about the basic rules of how to be safe... like don't walk down dark streets by yourself.

He started it so that he could teach women how to avoid rape. 

This thread was in reply to that thread.

The name of the thread cannot be changed now even though the conversation has taken different direction.... it's about educating our children, male and female, about sex and what's ok, what is not, what's considered rape, no=no, get consent, give clear consent.


----------



## Personal

always_alone said:


> Most of the resistance and complaints have been things like "you expect men to be mind readers", "I'm so busy getting off I wouldn't notice the zombie apocalypse", "she was sending mixed signals", and so on.


If one pays more attention to the others response, they are far more likely to share a more mutually satisfying experience when there is mutual consent.


----------



## Ripper

Don't know if anyone here is keeping up with this, but the reported gangrape scandal that caused the University of Virginia to suspended all "Greek" activity is now being called into question. It was first mentioned by Rolling Stone who has released the following:

_"In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced," Will Dana, the magazine's managing editor, wrote on its website._

Couple of links.
Rolling Stone backs off from U.Va. rape story
Rolling Stone Backpedals On UVA Rape Story, Says 'Trust' in Victim Misplaced - NBC News

Make of it what you will. Extremists have made gender relations absolutely toxic right now.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> I'm not stuck on consent repeated need for consent, I just don't see how one takes making out as consent to sex. It really is as simple as it sounds, so I don't see validity in your diatribe without evidence to your claims which I will continue to assume is your opinion. And, you have a right to such opinions.


Welp, here's another wall-o-text under the assumption that you're not just being irrationally obstinate.

Have you ever had a make out session that he escalated to sex? Did he ask? Did you expressly consent? Neither is likely nor common. During the make out, how does he judge whether to pursue more than the make out? Should he never pursue more? If you don't require express consent at every turn, how does anything more happen (how did you even get to making out) if neither party is free to pursue it? He judges it from your present actions and takes a shot. You present no resistance to his escalation (which is likely also how you got to making out in the first place, he probably didn't ask if it was ok to make out). This is pretty much the textbook definition of implied consent (which I'll pull for you).

It's not my opinion. It is legal doctrine. Even if I thought that making out should not constitute implied consent, it still HAS and most often DOES in court. My opinion is worthless, juries decide whether her behaviors constitute implied consent and to convict or not. These actions fit the definition.

From one of my law textbooks (I was originally planning to be a lawyer):

*Implied consent*

"[...] consent when surrounding circumstances exist which would lead a reasonable person to believe that this consent had been given, although no direct, express or explicit words of agreement had been uttered. [...] based on the fact that one person has been doing a particular thing and the other person expects him/her *to continue*."

To wit, in making out, he has good reason to believe that additional sexual activity is on the table. Most sex does not involve asking. If she is to change the status quo, she must show resistance (no). Her inaction as he advances continues to imply her consent. She doesn't get to do nothing, and still claim it's rape. Else a woman can arbitrarily claim rape at any time simply by... well, doing nothing. Surprise buddy!!! You're a rapist now!

Here's a version you can check yourself, since you won't take my word for anything.

implied consent legal definition of implied consent

IMPLIED CONSENT: 

"Consent that is inferred from signs, actions, or facts, or by inaction or silence."

She's engaging in an explicit sexual activity (consenting signs, actions, facts), and does not resist further advances (inaction, silence). That's implied consent as clearly as it gets.

What evidence would convince you? How can I prove a negative? No jury in the US has ever convicted anyone of rape on the basis that their formerly active partner becoming passive. Is every man who escalated a make out session to penetration guilty of rape because she just layed there? You just created a lot of rapists. Pretty sure that means I've orally raped a lot of women. Oh wait, I didn't... they welcomed it? How am I to know if inactivity is withdrawal of consent implied from whatever we were doing before oral? See, your sexual activity implies consent. Your not subsequently saying no or resisting in any way continues that implied consent. We didn't ask to kiss you. We didn't ask to make out. We don't ask for sex. You got on the train. The train moves. It takes your action to get off the train at the stop you want to.

You don't have to like that or agree that it should. You can prefer that consent always be express if you like. But my opinion on it is irrelevant. It is the jury's responsibility to make that determination, and no jury has ever convicted on the basis of the accuser going from active to passive.

Being scared is not legal incapacitation, nor is being still clear indication to your partner of withdrawal of consent. A man is not legally required to explicitly ask, nor receive express consent. The vast majority of the time, people don't ask for sex. Sexual consent is most often implied. We can say, "why would a man even want sex with a passive woman?" But even if I agree, that's a matter of preference only, not a standard for rape. Maybe she prefers just lying there. Maybe he enjoys that. It's no standard of rape.

Don't like it, advocate changing the law such that express consent is required. Guys will ask at every single step if you want them to and that's the law. But you know you don't actually want men asking at every turn, and that's in fact why we don't already give asking priority. Instead of slowly gliding our hands into your panty line giving you amble opportunity to express any resistance, you'll have "can I put my hand in your pants?" "Can I touch your breasts?" It's all good, men don't really care, it just needs to be consistent. We're not all of the sudden rapists because you stopped doing anything. And I think most people will agree, asking for express consent is a parody of most real life sexual activity. 

If you don't want to change the law, I don't think it's fair to call it "date rape" just because you regret your own inability to stand up for yourself and want to blame someone else for it. Men should not be expected to manage your boundaries for you, read your minds and express your concerns. It is your job to express yourself.

Teach girls that it is their responsibility, not men's, to be confident in their wants and voice their concerns. Teach them to take care of themselves and not blame men for their inability advocate their interests vs a boy's. Teach them to be agents, not dependents.


----------



## EleGirl

Ripper said:


> Don't know if anyone here is keeping up with this, but the reported gangrape scandal that caused the University of Virginia to suspended all "Greek" activity is now being called into question. It was first mentioned by Rolling Stone who has released the following:
> 
> _"In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced," Will Dana, the magazine's managing editor, wrote on its website._
> 
> Couple of links.
> Rolling Stone backs off from U.Va. rape story
> Rolling Stone Backpedals On UVA Rape Story, Says 'Trust' in Victim Misplaced - NBC News
> 
> Make of it what you will. Extremists have made gender relations absolutely toxic right now.


Did she give names of the guys who she says raped her? From all I've read, I don't think so.

If she's lying, and it sounds like she probably is, she and she alone is responsible for her lie. it's despicable.


----------



## MaritimeGuy

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> The law just doesn't get it then. 3 essential legal elements of rape: 1) penetration, 2) consent, 3) force. Force must be proven and force doesn't exist without resistance.


For me the test of whether something is right or wrong or not is not whether or not I can get away with it. 

You are making the assumption if there is no resistance there is implied consent. For me I look at it the other way...if there is no active participation there is no consent. 

There are women who may not actively resist when you push for sex. It may be immaturity, it may be low self esteem, it may be intoxication, it may be intimidation...it could be a lot of things. That woman will regret having had sex the morning after. It may not meet the legal definition of rape but that doesn't make it something anyone should want to be a party to.


----------



## Ikaika

_Implied consent is a broadly based legal concept. *Whether it is as valid as express consent depends on the situation and the applicable law. *For example, the owner of a car generally is liable for an accident caused by someone who drove that car with his or her consent. In many states, that consent can be express or implied, and implied consent may arise from seemingly innocuous actions. For instance, a habit of leaving the keys in the car's ignition may under law imply that the owner consents to anyone else's—even a car thief's—driving the car._

I guess this bold part is interesting. 

_Implied consent as the result of inaction is *most commonly found in litigation procedures*. For instance, a party to a lawsuit may have the legal right to object to a court hearing that is scheduled to occur before the party has obtained certain crucial documents. But if the party appears at the hearing and allows it to proceed without objecting, the party has waived the right to later object or appeal. By failing to take action to cancel or reschedule the hearing, the party is said to have implied its consent to the hearing._

Ok, so are we talking litigation, criminal and or moral? 

Because now after reading what you posted, I'm even more confused and even more likely to be convinced that assuming making out to imply consent of sex is less likely.

Oh and btw, I'm a male


----------



## Ripper

EleGirl said:


> Did she give names of the guys who she says raped her? From all I've read, I don't think so.


It is being investigated by the local PD and lists seven suspects. Apparently she gave some vague information, first names, descriptions, etc and they are looking for individuals who match. The PD is continuing its investigation regardless, as it should.


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> My assailants thought of themselves as regular people with regular parents doing nothing wrong. So how can this be?


If someone rapes someone, I don't blame it on the parents. 

Parents can teach all the correct things to a child. Doesn't mean they will do it.

I think teaching your son to not to be too sexual with their girlfriends if they aren't sure they are into it might help 'regular people' behave. But saying the same thing to someone capable of rape, wouldn't have any effect.


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> We are not talking about teaching already grown people. Maybe the title should have said how to raise boys into men who?


Yes, that would have been a much better title for this discussion.


----------



## Ikaika

Most of what I read about the criminal aspects around implied consent (including the one you listed) has to do with the criminal's implied consent (as in the case of the drunk driver). In this case you assume the implied consent of the alleged victim is the same. It is as if to convict a murder case but the to suggest the victim implied consent to be murdered. How does that square?

I just don't see this as a wrong or right issue, it is one of a clear communication issue. 

I guess the question should be rephrased: *does silence imply consent?*

But to bring it back to the topic at hand, what is the moral implication on this issue and not just the legal ramifications? And, what should we be teaching our children?

For my sons, I will teach them a lot of things along with "don't assume you are a mind reader, no matter how hot and heavy the situation may get."


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> To go on with both moral and legal implications, I think the following is important to consider and my trouble with the notion of implied consent.
> 
> _There’s more to determining whether a sexual encounter is consensual than the word “no,” he said, even if a word isn’t spoken. "Silence is not consent,”..._. Source: Star News(Wilmington, NC) June 26, 2005, Sunday. When ‘No’ is not Enough / Lack of Evidence can Make ‘Date’ Rape Difficult to Prove. By John DeSantis, Staff Writer
> 
> I believe this is an important conversation to have and by no means do I believe my opinions on the matter are completely right or wrong. But, we should be careful to cast aspersions on another's opinion and I apologize if I have done so. I am simply trying to understand the extent of the topic. Some parts are easy to decipher, others not so much.


The "silence is not consent" argument is also called "affirmative consent" or "active consent". It's just another trotting out of express consent. To require explicit statement.

The problem with affirmative consent, is that instead of demanding a stop when the activity has reached your limit, you're requiring express consent to every action. "Kiss me... but that doesn't mean touch my breast. Touch my breast, but that doesn't mean touch me anywhere else. Yes, make out with me, but no sex. Where does one activity really begin and another end? That's a lot of questions. It also mostly puts women in the driver's seat, which is a place research tells us women don't prefer to be when it comes to sexual activity. She doesn't want to tell him what to do.

Gone is the natural progression of intimacy behind slow and steady male assertiveness. Replacing it is women telling men what to do. Without express consent, you can't have a man do anything other than ask at every step.

Is this the sex people want? I don't think it is. It's certainly not the sex most people actually have.


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> The "silence is not consent" argument is also called "affirmative consent" or "active consent". It's just another trotting out of express consent. To require explicit statement.
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with affirmative consent, is that instead of demanding a stop when the activity has reached your limit, you're requiring express consent to every action. "Kiss me... but that doesn't mean touch my breast. Touch my breast, but that doesn't mean touch me anywhere else. Yes, make out with me, but no sex. Where does one activity really begin and another end? That's a lot of questions. It also mostly puts women in the driver's seat, which is a place research tells us women don't prefer to be when it comes to sexual activity. She doesn't want to tell him what to do.
> 
> 
> 
> Gone is the natural progression of intimacy behind slow and steady male assertiveness. Replacing it is women telling men what to do. Without express consent, you can't have a man do anything other than ask at every step.
> 
> 
> 
> Is this the sex people want? I don't think it is. It's certainly not the sex most people actually have.



I guess as point of self preservation for my sons, I will abandon the natural order of things to teach them the expectations of society. Clear communication.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> Most of what I read about the criminal aspects around implied consent (including the one you listed) has to do with the criminal's implied consent. In this case you assume the implied consent of the alleged victim is the same. It is as if to convict a murder case but the to suggest the victim implied consent to be murdered. How does that square?


I don't follow any of what you're saying about "the criminal's implied consent" or murder. Consent is not an element of murder. Murder is an illegal killing whether a person says "kill me" or not. Consent is however, an essential element of rape.



Ikaika said:


> I guess the question should be rephrased: *does silence imply consent?*


Implied consent is not only built on silence. It is all of the activity, actions and inactions surrounding the event. If I start undressing some random person out of the blue and they say/do nothing, that is still sexual assault. A reasonable person will not believe that consent is given. If she's making out with me, and I remove her shirt, consent is implied. The status quo leads a reasonable person to believe that additional sexual activity will continue. It is her burden to revoke the status quo - the consent implied by the previous sexual activity - by saying, "no, this is as far as it goes."



Ikaika said:


> But to bring it back to the topic at hand, what is the moral implication on this issue and not just the legal ramifications? And, what should we be teaching our children?


Teach girls to own themselves. If you're not confident enough to say no to anything, you shouldn't be doing anything.

Boys are already regularly taught that no means no. She says no, you stop that.

No is not eternal however. Just because she said no yesterday doesn't mean he should forever give up on respectful advances. 

I refuse to teach my son that he has to ask for sex, only to have his future wife come to TAM one day complaining about how unattractive it is that her husband always asks for sex.


----------



## EleGirl

Ripper said:


> It is being investigated by the local PD and lists seven suspects. Apparently she gave some vague information, first names, descriptions, etc and they are looking for individuals who match. The PD is continuing its investigation regardless, as it should.


Oh yea, I read the other day that she gave nicknames for the guys.

If she lied, she needs to be in big trouble for this. It hurts the case of every real rape victim.


----------



## Cletus

MaritimeGuy said:


> There are women who may not actively resist when you push for sex. It may be immaturity, it may be low self esteem, it may be intoxication, it may be intimidation...it could be a lot of things. That woman will regret having had sex the morning after. It may not meet the legal definition of rape but that doesn't make it something anyone should want to be a party to.


Hmmmm. I've had sex that was completely consensual that I regretted 30 seconds later. Not sure this is a good standard to apply. You can only go by what both parties are feeling at the time, assuming appropriate decision making capacity is present.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> I guess as point of self preservation for my sons, I will abandon the natural order of things to teach them the expectations of society. Clear communication.


Will that change anything though? I suspect it will still be the boys who act rather than ask, that get the majority of the action. They'll be the assertive and "cool" boys the girls want. Not the safe ones who ask and dote.

That one is just my opinion.

Which message do you think the boys will hear more clearly? Yours, or the one that is more likely to get sex?


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I don't follow any of what you're saying about "the criminal's implied consent" or murder. Consent is not an element of murder. Murder is an illegal killing whether a person says "kill me" or not. *Consent is however, an essential element of rape.*


Is this the same as implied consent?









DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Implied consent is not only built on silence. It is all of the activity, actions and inactions surrounding the event. *If I start undressing someone and they say/do nothing, that is sexual assault. A reasonable person is will not believe that consent is given. If she's making out with me, and I remove her shirt, consent is implied. *


I guess this is where I'm having difficulty. Removing her blouse in one case is a "no no" but in the other it is implied consent? I guess I'm having a hard time making the direct connection. I could think of a number of reasons why she is remaining silent over de-robing her let alone assume sex. I'm sorry, I still see this as an opinion on your part and none of the legal links have yet to convince me otherwise. 









DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Teach girls to own themselves. If you're not confident enough to say no to anything, you shouldn't be doing anything.
> 
> 
> 
> Boys are already regularly taught that no means no. She says no, you stop that.
> 
> 
> 
> No is not eternal however. Just because she said no yesterday doesn't mean he should forever give up on respectful advances.
> 
> 
> 
> I refuse to teach my son that he has to ask for sex, only to have his future wife come to TAM one day complaining about how unattractive it is that her husband always asks for sex.



I have no issue with this, but I believe it is just as important to teach both boys and girls on this issue.


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Will that change anything though? I suspect it will still be the boys who act rather than ask, that get the majority of the action. They'll be the assertive and "cool" boys the girls want. Not the safe ones who ask and dote.
> 
> 
> 
> That one is just my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> Which message do you think the boys will hear more clearly? Yours, or the one that is more likely to get sex?



Parenting is not for the faint of heart. It never stops and we worry constantly no matter how much we work toward raising boys to be men.


----------



## that.girl

Dvl, as you well know, being accused of rape is quite damaging to a boy, even without a conviction. 

Teach your son whatever you like. I hope for his sake it goes well for him.


----------



## norajane

Ikaika said:


> Ok, so are we talking litigation, criminal and or moral?
> 
> Because now after reading what you posted, I'm even more confused and even more likely to be convinced that assuming making out to imply consent of sex is less likely.
> 
> Oh and btw, I'm a male


All the more reason to ASK!


----------



## Ikaika

norajane said:


> All the more reason to ASK!



I agree


----------



## Faithful Wife

"But asking is a boner killer!" WAHHHH!!!!


----------



## Ikaika

Faithful Wife said:


> "But asking is a boner killer!" WAHHHH!!!!



Only if she says no.


----------



## Faithful Wife

The only reason someone would have a problem with asking is someone who believes the answer will be no. Which is sad to think about not wanting to ask just because you think they will say no because obviously this implies the person is already aware the do NOT have enthusiastic consent. So rapey.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> The only reason someone would have a problem with asking is someone who believes the answer will be no. Which is sad to think about not wanting to ask just because you think they will say no because obviously this implies the person is already aware the do NOT have enthusiastic consent. So rapey.


Young inexperienced lovers might have difficulty articulating things too. Neither "May I pleasure you orally" or "Can I eat your *****" are going to come easy to a 17 year old. Much less awkward to try and be rebuffed.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening Chaos
can it? I though statutary rape was sex with a consenting minor. Maybe you are in a location with different laws from where I am?




chaos said:


> I beg to differ because it can fall under statutory rape.


----------



## that.girl

Cletus said:


> Young inexperienced lovers might have difficulty articulating things too. Neither "May I pleasure you orally" or "Can I eat your *****" are going to come easy to a 17 year old. Much less awkward to try and be rebuffed.


I'd be fine with trying, and checking for a positive reaction. 

Implied consent is lack of a negative. Non-verbal consent is a positive action. If she puts her fingers in his hair and moans, call it good. If she just lays there, ask "is this ok?" If just laying there is her thing, then now he knows that and doesn't have to wonder.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus...it doesn't matter how awkward it is. Why should I feel sorry for awkward teens? They are going to have sex with each other no matter what we do and the are going to feel awkward about it all whether they talk about it or not. 

Honest question: why should anyone care more about awkwardness than they care about false or real rape charges?


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
Active consent is tougher than it sounds. After >25 years my wife will not actively ask for sex. If I ask what she wants, she will say "I don't know", "do something". In the end what happens is that I try various things and if she doesn't tell me to stop I keep doing them". 

Its not the way I want things to be, but with rare exceptions she can't bring herself to verbally admit that she wants something sexual even when she very much does. Not that she enjoys a very wide range of activities - she just has a mental block about asking for them.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Richard...a marriage is not the same scenario as teaching consent to young people.


----------



## Ikaika

FrenchFry said:


> I don't know if it's tough or if it's something that takes practice--something that if you start laying out the groundwork earlier it becomes second nature.
> 
> I don't remember a single instance of teenage fooling around that wasn't at least a little awkward. I've been bonking the same dude for 6 years and there are still really awkward situations. Sex can be awkward and goofy. We should incorporate that into the broader teaching of our kids that this is not a perfect process--fine tuning is required and shouldn't be ignored.



Well said


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> Cletus...it doesn't matter how awkward it is. Why should I feel sorry for awkward teens? They are going to have sex with each other no matter what we do and the are going to feel awkward about it all whether they talk about it or not.
> 
> Honest question: why should anyone care more about awkwardness than they care about false or real rape charges?


Because I try as much as I can to root all of my arguments in the reality that is, not the reality I want. I care because it actually happens. I don't care more about one or the other. I care about "boots on the ground" sex between (possibly) inhibited partners. 

I think asking to perform certain acts on your partner is going to be more difficult for more teens than is the simple act of saying "no".

Awkwardness in sexual matters is going to hinder some kids in their expression of sexuality. Did I say kids? Ooops - I meant people. And you know how I know. 

I will add my (now standard) disclaimer that I think it can only do good to teach these things, but I'm more interested in discovering the ways in which they will fail and why.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Sure they will fail. So what? Some teens are still going to get pregnant even though they had consent and used protection. We learn from failure more than from success in some things.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> Sure they will fail. So what? Some teens are still going to get pregnant even though they had consent and used protection. We learn from failure more than from success in some things.


Sure. But when failure comes with a baby or a jail term, or in the context of this thread a broken psyche, it behooves us to minimize those failures. 

That's why I personally think it's a good idea to get every teenage girl a long term form of birth control that doesn't require her to take a pill every day or carry a condom that she might not use in her purse. 

Fail-safe, for those accidents that have outcomes too far-reaching to let natural consequences be the teacher.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Failure in the form of a jail term is exactly why kids will need to suck it up and say those oh so awkward words of consent. Boo frikken who for the awkwardness.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> Failure in the form of a jail term is exactly why kids will need to suck it up and say those oh so awkward words of consent. Boo frikken who for the awkwardness.


We could just tack it onto the tail end of abstinence only training. How could it possibly fail?


----------



## Cletus

FrenchFry said:


> :rofl: fw is for abstinence-only training.


Boys: always ask permission. Girls: Just say no. NEVER say yes.


----------



## Faithful Wife

You guys wouldn't let your teens near my early sex skills class probably. But the teens would be lining up to hear my consent lessons because I would make it so much fun. There would be a year long waiting list. There would be actual discussions about pleasure and the clitoris and orgasms and the fun stuff you get out of sex.

There really is no teenager who can't understand the words "you need someone's verbal consent before you touch them". Give them more credit.


----------



## chaos

Faithful Wife said:


> You guys wouldn't let your teens near my early sex skills class probably. But the teens would be lining up to hear my consent lessons because I would make it so much fun. There would be a year long waiting list. There would be actual discussions about pleasure and the clitoris and orgasms and the fun stuff you get out of sex.
> 
> There really is no teenager who can't understand the words "you need someone's verbal consent before you touch them". Give them more credit.


Yeah but would they be able to "handle" the homework? :rofl:


----------



## Faithful Wife

Homework every night will be to masturbate without porn in order to learn how their own bodies work so that they will be able to talk to their future partners about it.


----------



## Ikaika

Faithful Wife said:


> Homework every night will be to masturbate without porn in order to learn how their own bodies work so that they will be able to talk to their future partners about it.


"what are you doing in the shower, you have been in there too long?" "moooom, please don't bother me I have to get my homework done."


----------



## chaos

Faithful Wife said:


> Homework every night will be to masturbate without porn in order to learn how their own bodies work so that they will be able to talk to their future partners about it.


Then why would I need a partner if I can become my favorite porn actor?


----------



## Faithful Wife

There will be info on asexuality and self-only-sexuality for those who do not want a partner at this time or maybe ever.


----------



## EleGirl

Faithful Wife said:


> Cletus...it doesn't matter how awkward it is. Why should I feel sorry for awkward teens? They are going to have sex with each other no matter what we do and the are going to feel awkward about it all whether they talk about it or not.
> 
> Honest question: why should anyone care more about awkwardness than they care about false or real rape charges?


If they are old enough and mature enough to have sex, they should be able to talk about it. If they cannot, they have no business having sex.

If she gets knocked up... neither of them is off the hook. There are many ways in which sex can go wrong.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> If they are old enough and mature enough to have sex, they should be able to talk about it. If they cannot, they have no business having sex.


So? I expect the teens of this country will continue to flaunt that advice for as long as there are teens in America.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> So? I expect the teens of this country will continue to flaunt that advice for as long as there are teens in America.


Maybe as a society, we need to stop treating teens like 5 years olds. 

In post of human history, any kid 13 and over was considered an adult. they had to work, they married, etc.

Teens are perfectly capable of taking responsibility for their own actions, to include sex.


----------



## EleGirl

Faithful Wife said:


> Homework every night will be to masturbate without porn in order to learn how their own bodies work so that they will be able to talk to their future partners about it.


You could make a killing if you did a youtube channel for this sex education class of yours. Make it fun enough and every kid will watch it for entertainment but learn at the same time.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus said:


> So? I expect the teens of this country will continue to flaunt that advice for as long as there are teens in America.


You asked earlier for an honest opinion from women if you seem to "get it" or not.

Frankly, no you don't seem to get it to me, because you seem to be arguing a point that is pointless. HOW could anyone argue AGAINST something that is meant to protect our teens and has no KNOWN bad side?

I really am kinda surprised here.

I have had to guess that your experience is so limited that you simply can't think outside of it enough to "get it".

Remember you said you wouldn't be mad at us for our honest answers.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> Maybe as a society, we need to stop treating teens like 5 years olds.
> 
> In post of human history, any kid 13 and over was considered an adult. they had to work, they married, etc.
> 
> Teens are perfectly capable of taking responsibility for their own actions, to include sex.


And if you think that 13 year olds are as equipped as 25 year olds to make responsible decisions, I will have to point you to the research that unequivocally shows otherwise.


----------



## Faithful Wife

EleGirl said:


> You could make a killing if you did a youtube channel for this sex education class of yours. Make it fun enough and every kid will watch it for entertainment but learn at the same time.


Well, I'm doing education work already through my blog...but there's always Laci Green. She literally says all these same things about consent, sex, pleasure, knowing your own body, etc. There is a script for it now to give teens (via the sex positive community) and she delivers that script in a way they really connect with. Plus she's hot as hell.

Here's her consent video, including examples:

https://www.youtube.com/user/lacigreen


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> And if you think that 13 year olds are as equipped as 25 year olds to make responsible decisions, I will have to point you to the research that unequivocally shows otherwise.


Oh I agree that 13 year olds are not as mature as 25 year olds.

If kids are so unable to take responsibility for sex, why are we as parents allowing our children 13 and older to have sex? Why aren't we supervising them better?

This like saying 13 year olds like to blow things up. They are not responsible enough to use explosives. But we are just going to leave explosives around for them to use.


----------



## Ikaika

It is not as if I don't understand where dvls8 and a few others are coming from in their argument. I also did not mean to suggest they were altogether wrong when I said I disagreed with certain aspects of their consent argument. 

I mean I come from a very touchy feely culture. It is not uncommon when a non relative "female" who I know very well, when we greet we greet with a kiss. This is done even in the presence of my wife. Mind you it is not a passionate kiss (like lovers) closer to peck and a hug. But, culturally, the interpretation is understood without having to verbally discuss its meaning. So yes, in circumstances where things are understood I get it. However, outside of my culture, I understand enough of the boundaries of the world that some things need to be clarified. 

So no hard feelings. Aloha and malama pono. I hope you don't mind Anon, I leave you with some of my culture on this aloha Friday. 

http://youtu.be/QbU9xC9i_uU

Btw, my cousins daughter is one of the dancers.


----------



## EleGirl

Faithful Wife said:


> Well, I'm doing education work already through my blog...but there's always Laci Green. She literally says all these same things about consent, sex, pleasure, knowing your own body, etc. There is a script for it now to give teens (via the sex positive community) and she delivers that script in a way they really connect with. Plus she's hot as hell.


I learn something new every day!


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> You asked earlier for an honest opinion from women if you seem to "get it" or not.
> 
> Frankly, no you don't seem to get it to me, because you seem to be arguing a point that is pointless. HOW could anyone argue AGAINST something that is meant to protect our teens and has no KNOWN bad side?


I've said it in enough detail previously that you'd understand my point if you really wanted to.

I'm arguing that most of our effort ought to be on teaching solutions with the highest probability of success, and I consider replacing a simple means ("no") with one that injects ambiguity into the system to be a means of reducing it's likelihood of success.

I have also said (until I'm horse now) that I think teaching this is good and necessary, but that I don't like the shift away from "no means no" to active consent. I think "no means no" is the underlying must-be-banged-into-our-sons-heads at a minimum baseline, to be augmented with active consent. I have not once in this thread said that teaching active consent is bad as long as it is not the only thing we teach. 

I am trying to be purely pragmatic and account for the majority of boys who don't want to rape but don't necessarily know how to be responsible lovers, but who sure-as-hell understand the meaning of the word "no". One simple rule, no exceptions, nothing to remember, infer, ask about, or get wrong.

So crucify me for "not getting it".


----------



## ConanHub

Faithful Wife said:


> Homework every night will be to masturbate without porn in order to learn how their own bodies work so that they will be able to talk to their future partners about it.


You dirty little pervert!


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> Oh I agree that 13 year olds are not as mature as 25 year olds.
> 
> If kids are so unable to take responsibility for sex, why are we as parents allowing our children 13 and older to have sex? Why aren't we supervising them better?


I was sneaking out of my bedroom at 16 to have sex - climbing down the side of a house, quietly getting on a bike, and riding 10 miles one way in the middle of the night. Short of bars on the windows, no one wasn't supervising me. I was subverting the supervision. 

When my parents did find out, they forbade me from seeing the girl anymore and moved my bedroom downstairs. Didn't stop us for a second - we'd sneak off into the woods at lunch.

That's the lengths teens will go to to have sex.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> I've said it in enough detail previously that you'd understand my point if you really wanted to.
> 
> I'm arguing that most of our effort ought to be on teaching solutions with the highest probability of success, and I consider replacing a simple means ("no") with one that injects ambiguity into the system to be a means of reducing it's likelihood of success.
> 
> I have also said (until I'm horse now) that I think teaching this is good and necessary, but that I don't like the shift away from "no means no" to active consent. I think "no means no" is the underlying must-be-banged-into-our-sons-heads at a minimum baseline, to be augmented with active consent. I have not once in this thread said that teaching active consent is bad as long as it is not the only thing we teach.
> 
> I am trying to be purely pragmatic and account for the majority of boys who don't want to rape but don't necessarily know how to be responsible lovers, but who sure-as-hell understand the meaning of the word "no". One simple rule, no exceptions, nothing to remember, infer, ask about, or get wrong.
> 
> So crucify me for "not getting it".


I think that everyone here has said to do both: Teach "no" means "no". Teach girls and boy that they have to use it when they mean "NO". and teach active consent to both boys and girls.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> I think that everyone here has said to do both: Teach "no" means "no". Teach girls and boy that they have to use it when they mean "NO". and teach active consent to both boys and girls.


Then we are all in agreement.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> I was sneaking out of my bedroom at 16 to have sex - climbing down the side of a house, quietly getting on a bike, and riding 10 miles one way in the middle of the night. Short of bars on the windows, no one wasn't supervising me. I was subverting the supervision.
> 
> When my parents did find out, they forbade me from seeing the girl anymore and moved my bedroom downstairs. Didn't stop us for a second - we'd sneak off into the woods at lunch.
> 
> That's the lengths teens will go to to have sex.


Yes, that is what some will do. 

That is why they need to be taught to be responsible and about consent and "No".


----------



## Faithful Wife

You said you wouldn't hold it against us. You asked. I didn't ask for your backlash in return.

I still maintain that it shows a huge amount of ignorance to argue against "yes means yes". You seem to think I'm only trying to protect girls or something yet enthusiastic consent protect boys as much as girls. Don't forget too that some of us have gay teen boys. What side of the argument would you take on that one? 

I wish you would watch Laci's video and perhaps realize it isn't as wacky and far out there as you are making it out to be.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> Then we are all in agreement.


We have been for a long time here.

Well most of us. There are a few .... :scratchhead:


----------



## chaos

EleGirl said:


> We have been for a long time here.
> 
> Well most of us. There are a few .... :scratchhead:


The devil is in the details though.


----------



## that.girl

Cletus said:


> I was sneaking out of my bedroom at 16 to have sex - climbing down the side of a house, quietly getting on a bike, and riding 10 miles one way in the middle of the night. Short of bars on the windows, no one wasn't supervising me. I was subverting the supervision.
> 
> When my parents did find out, they forbade me from seeing the girl anymore and moved my bedroom downstairs. Didn't stop us for a second - we'd sneak off into the woods at lunch.
> 
> That's the lengths teens will go to to have sex.


I think repeatedly sneaking off into the woods together to get busy might be a good example of implied consent.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> I still maintain that it shows a huge amount of ignorance to argue against "yes means yes". You seem to think I'm only trying to protect girls or something yet enthusiastic consent protect boys as much as girls. Don't forget too that some of us have gay teen boys. What side of the argument would you take on that one?
> 
> I wish you would watch Laci's video and perhaps realize it isn't as wacky and far out there as you are making it out to be.


I would welcome adding it to sex ed curriculum. But it still comes up short in one key area - helping define when you should ask for consent. Consider the boyfriend who thinks that approval to put his hands below his gfs waist is approval to put his face between her thighs. Doesn't matter why, he doesn't recognize a distinction. As long as she says "no", we're golden. But what if she doesn't? What if, at that point, she freezes up? 

It's a good video. Although at the 2:25 mark she sure seems to indicate that a grin on your face without words is consent.


----------



## Cletus

that.girl said:


> I think repeatedly sneaking off into the woods together to get busy might be a good example of implied consent.


Yes, yes it was. There were no consent issues, because I waited for her to ask ME before we first got busy.


----------



## Ikaika

Faithful Wife said:


> Well, I'm doing education work already through my blog...but there's always Laci Green. She literally says all these same things about consent, sex, pleasure, knowing your own body, etc. There is a script for it now to give teens (via the sex positive community) and she delivers that script in a way they really connect with. Plus she's hot as hell.
> 
> Here's her consent video, including examples:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/user/lacigreen



Very good, well done video.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus said:


> I would welcome adding it to sex ed curriculum. But it still comes up short in one key area - helping define when you should ask for consent. Consider the boyfriend who thinks that approval to put his hands below his gfs waist is approval to put his face between her thighs. Doesn't matter why, he doesn't recognize a distinction. As long as she says "no", we're golden. But what if she doesn't? What if, at that point, she freezes up?


Cletus...these aren't my ideas. These are concepts that have had think tanks of brilliant minds and millions of dollars thrown at them by sex educators and institutions, trying to come up with the best ways to keep everyone safe, help everyone understand reproduction, and help everyone actually have good sex instead of shameful, awkward sex.

These things you keep asking do have answers. There are lists that give you an answer for every situation.

Once someone stops trying to come up with specific scenarios where it won't work (and finding there really is a way it can always work), then it can sink in...this system is already in place and working for millions of kids. They are ahead of us at this point. 

It isn't just me saying this. Wait and watch what happens over the next few years. Progress has come and taken over here. So it really doesn't matter who wants to try to push back against this tide, the tide is coming and won't stop.


----------



## EleGirl

By the way, as the thread about sexual assault/rape against males points out, men say that they are assaulted/raped as often as women are. 60% of the perps are male, 50% are female (according to the men reporting)

So you'd think that this topic would be important to men as well. Just a thought.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> It isn't just me saying this. Wait and watch what happens over the next few years. Progress has come and taken over here. So it really doesn't matter who wants to try to push back against this tide, the tide is coming and won't stop.


This is what's frustrating. This isn't a tired old man sitting at a computer railing against change. This is someone who wants to find the best solution to a thorny problem. 

Regarding the recently passed affirmative consent law in California - 

"The bill originally required that affirmative consent be “communicated.” This was taken out, and the final version permits affirmative consent to be nonverbal. Nonverbal communication can take many forms and will always be subject to misinterpretation."

https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2014/10/23/campuses-must-wrestle-affirmative-consent-standard-sexual-assault-essay

I'm sorry that you see my desire to not create an even more ambiguous definition of assault as somehow being obstructive. I think I've been pretty clear all along that my goal is to reduce assaults by the best method available. My personal opinion is that this is not it - that this is a great tool for helping people improve their relations, but a less than optimal tool for adjudicating assault. Two people can agree on the goal without agreeing on the means to achieve it. 

There's nothing further I can add to the consistent message I've stated here, so I should probably bow out here.


----------



## EleGirl

If they don't use the phrase "no means no", it does not meant that using "no" will not be a valid way to indicate that someone does not consent.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus said:


> I'm sorry that you see my desire to not create an even more ambiguous definition of assault as somehow being obstructive. I think I've been pretty clear all along that my goal is to reduce assaults by the best method available. My personal opinion is that this is not it - that this is a great tool for helping people improve their relations, but a less than optimal tool for adjudicating assault. Two people can agree on the goal without agreeing on the means to achieve it.


The only reason you have given behind your thoughts that this is not the best method available have to do with awkwardness and the horrible task of actually asking questions and getting ongoing "yes" answers. The fact that asking the question is tripping you up still makes me think you just don't get it.

I'm not even saying this IS the "best" method, I'm saying it is the current model that is promoted by the highest minds in the sex education community. No doubt this model will expand and get better over time.

But for now, there are millions of kids putting this model into place successfully and until there is some kind of evidence that that this is not the best model we have thus far, I think people should go with it. And I'm not saying "oh well, this is the best we have" either. I'm saying this model is working excellently and if you had some way to prove otherwise, I'd be happy to hear it. The worries you are presenting are not stopping people from happily employing enthusiastic consent principals AND having great or awkward sex, right at this very moment.

I would encourage you or anyone who does want to contribute to a better model to go do your research and work on it. I'm open to hearing anything and so are lots of other people who are into sex education. But I'm pretty sure the top minds who are on it are on the right track based on the success it is having.

Kids don't have our bias. They don't balk at the idea of "yes means yes" or asking questions, period. Only adults balk at it.


----------



## Moops

EleGirl said:


> By the way, as the thread about sexual assault/rape against males points out*, men say that they are assaulted/raped as often as women are. 60% of the perps are male, 50% are female (according to the men reporting)*
> 
> So you'd think that this topic would be important to men as well. Just a thought.


I have a hard time believing that. Espcially the part about 50% of perps being women.

Women generally try to avoid sex, not have it. Nevermind raping a man to have it, that doesn't make much sense.


----------



## Faithful Wife

sigh...


----------



## EleGirl

Moops said:


> I have a hard time believing that. Espcially the part about 50% of perps being women.
> 
> *Women generally try to avoid sex, not have it.* Nevermind raping a man to have it, that doesn't make much sense.


You are clueless about women. Women who are taught that they are no supposed to like sex might try to avoid it.

But a woman how has not been brain washed loves sex.


----------



## EleGirl

Faithful Wife said:


> sigh...


No kidding.....


----------



## ConanHub

Moops said:


> I have a hard time believing that. Espcially the part about 50% of perps being women.
> 
> Women generally try to avoid sex, not have it. Nevermind raping a man to have it, that doesn't make much sense.


My head just about exploded! Time for beer and bed.

OUCH!

Where do you live brother?

You need to come out with me. I will be your wingman because I am married. I am not even as "pretty" as I used to be but I still get women in their twenties ready to rock. I can show you a world that has been hidden from you.

I am really feeling sorry for you.

Have a good night. I am not kidding on the offer.


----------



## JCD

NobodySpecial said:


> Statutory rape is statutory rape. I'll break up with you aint it. I think it would be easier on the men if we did not say everything that isn't rape is.


I agree


----------



## JCD

that.girl said:


> This would be true of men who ignore a no. But in many of these murky consent cases, they are nice, normal guys, and they NEVER KNOW IT HAPPENED.
> 
> They think they scored and she was a cold fish, so they never called her back. They have no idea that she went home, threw up, and cried herself to sleep. And they would probably feel horrible if they did know!
> 
> That's why this is such a tricky situation. A guy can say "I would never do that!" And genuinely mean it. But maybe he did that and never knew.
> 
> They weren't bad guys. Maybe she wasn't clear, maybe he wasn't paying attention. They lacked the education to understand what was happening.


You said something important there.

Very few guys make a distinct choice to 'just go rape'.

Instead, they tell themselves THE STORY.

They meet a girl who is kind of interested...and they make a pass...but the girl isn't that interested...so he figures 'she just needs a forceful man/needs warming up/doesn't know what she's missing and he pushes harder. Now things are getting weird and he's already gone this far and....and...

He thinks he can force her to be in the mood.

Next thing you know, he is standing next to this shattered female in a torn blouse, wondering how he came to this point.

He needs to hear that story...and he needs to understand that it is a pack of rationalizations in his quest to satisfy his penis. He needs to understand that rejection by a woman is not grounds for treating her as a party favor.

He needs to see HOW he can find himself in that situation BEFORE it happens, so when he starts to use this chain of shallow rationalizations, he can recognize them for what they are.

Because, in his (very biased at the time) mind, every single step he takes seems to make sense to him. He needs to see them from an outside perspective FIRST.

I think another critical point is that if their actions need to be addressed. This guy did a horrible thing and is a criminal. But we also want him to learn. 

Here is why it is so devastating when a woman doesn't come out. NOW, this guy is uncaught and HE GOT AWAY WITH IT! So now he is structuring these rationalizations in his mind. "She must not have minded TOO much. She didn't come after me. Hey...I got away with it. Maybe I can do this again..." See...he REALLY wants to forget the 'I am a bad guy' aspect of what he did. So he will build all these lies in his head to defend his ego.

And once he gets a second or third under his belt? I don't know.

So we tell the story to immunize our sons from trying to sell this load of crap to themselves.


----------



## Personal

Faithful Wife said:


> Well, I'm doing education work already through my blog...but there's always Laci Green. She literally says all these same things about consent, sex, pleasure, knowing your own body, etc. There is a script for it now to give teens (via the sex positive community) and she delivers that script in a way they really connect with. Plus she's hot as hell.
> 
> Here's her consent video, including examples:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/user/lacigreen


There's also the Midwest Teen Sex Show which although now defunct is well done, my wife and I are thinking of showing their podcasts to our son when he's 15. Amongst much other discussion of course, that will continue on from things that have already been talked about. I was impressed by the Laci Green videos as well.


----------



## Shoto1984

Not that its particularly relative the this "discussion...", but we do have a back drop of the UV rape case seeming to be falling apart as the alleged victim's story might be full of holes. That's not to say that she wasn't raped/assaulted but that for whatever reason (alcohol, drugs, mental health issues etc) she isn't able to retell the story accurately. Either way is a loose/loose for everyone (the school, the frat, "Jackie", "Drew", all victims everywhere etc.) 

Rolling Stone backs off from U.Va. rape story


----------



## Shoto1984

ConanHub said:


> There are a fairly high number of those types. Some grow out of it and some don't.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I'm not sure what a "fairly high number" means. Obviously one is too many but what is a high number? Is it thousands? millions? Is it some large percentage number of the male population? If most or a large percentage of rapes go unreported then its tough to get a grip on and will make studies difficult. It makes me wonder what the profile of the "typical rapist" is. What are the common factors that contribute to someone being more likely to commit these kinds of acts? Rural vs Urban? Religious vs Non Religious? Economic Status? Intact vs One Parent Home? Presence Of A Father In The Child's Life? Having Been Bullied As A Child? On and on.... when we can begin to understand the origins we more effectively deal with the issue.


----------



## Shoto1984

Anon Pink said:


> I am trying to understand how you, or any other man in this thread heard a blanket accusation from my title or opening post. I have read my post several times. I feel like I was pretty clear.
> 
> *I can only speak for myself but I offered some possibilities as to why some of us might feel this way. I'll also add that I'm sure it's not just the title and content of the first post but the tone and content of some of the other posters as well.*
> 
> I have to wonder if those being adamant in their push back are those with possible 'murky' experiences in their own past and are defending themselves against having to look at their own history under a different lens [and yes, I understand that statement might be seen as inflammatory. I am not suggesting any man pushing back is a closet rapist!!! But we all have experiences, not even involving sex, in which we look back as adults and can see a new twist on what we thought at the time...hindsight being 20/20 and all...]
> 
> *Or it might be that those who have more experience in the "grey" of these situations have that to draw upon, have thought more about it and so have more to say. Or other possibilities...*
> 
> 
> Aggressive agenda? WTF? I am trying to open a sincere dialogue, as I have stated MANY times in this thread! I am not pushing anything other than a deeper understanding between the sexes.
> 
> *I should have been clear that comment wasn't necessarily directed at you*
> 
> I challenge you to repost and quote any statement made by anyone in this thread that suggests you or anyone, male or female, would be okay watching their daughters be groped!
> 
> *challenge accepted*
> 
> 
> Why do you refuse to hear me? What words did I use that triggered you and made you feel attacked for being a male? How could I have asked this question differently so that I could open this dialogue without triggering you or anyone else into feeling attacked based on being a male?
> 
> *As its been stated, both men and women rape so how about a title of "Teach or children not to rape. How?" Or maybe a more focused topic dealing with consent since that seems like the central issue when you take away the psychopathic, violent rapist pigs *
> I'm trying to sincerely understand...


----------



## Shoto1984

*Anon I said this : So when women have grabbed my back side I was being sexually assaulted in that I hadn't given consent. I never thought of myself as a victim but wrong is wrong. Hmmmm.

And got this...*



EleGirl said:


> Whose talking about backsides?
> 
> How would you react to a man groping your daughter... grabbing her boobs or her crotch almost every time she got on a crowded bus? Are you ok with this?
> 
> How about a guy groping your wife's boobs and crotch... I guess you are ok with that?
> 
> Are you ok if you go somewhere with your daughter and your wife and a man does these things to them right there in front of you?


*I found it completely out of line. I don't have a wife but I have two young daughters and I would quite literally die for them (as I'm sure most of us would).*


----------



## JCD

Shoto1984 said:


> Not that its particularly relative the this "discussion...", but we do have a back drop of the UV rape case seeming to be falling apart as the alleged victim's story might be full of holes. That's not to say that she wasn't raped/assaulted but that for whatever reason (alcohol, drugs, mental health issues etc) she isn't able to retell the story accurately. Either way is a loose/loose for everyone (the school, the frat, "Jackie", "Drew", all victims everywhere etc.)
> 
> Rolling Stone backs off from U.Va. rape story


The 'journalist' (the quotes are deserved) was looking for a horrifying story about white male privilege, a gruesome rape, a apathetic college reaction. She went looking for it...and gosh darn if she didn't just find it!

Every year there is news about some Social Justice Warrior in college faking racial slurs painted on their door, or a hacked Facebook account, or something.

My favorite Twitter post "It seems a Rolling Stone also gathers no evidence."


----------



## EleGirl

Shoto1984 said:


> *Anon I said this : So when women have grabbed my back side I was being sexually assaulted in that I hadn't given consent. I never thought of myself as a victim but wrong is wrong. Hmmmm.
> 
> And got this...*
> 
> 
> 
> *I found it completely out of line. I don't have a wife but I have two young daughters and I would quite literally die for them (as I'm sure most of us would).*


I was not suggesting that this should happened to your wife (were you married) or your daughters. I was asking what yoru reaction would be. The point was that while you don't mind having your backside grabbed, many other people do. And we were not talking about backside, we were talking about groping even more personal body parts.


----------



## EleGirl

JCD said:


> The 'journalist' (the quotes are deserved) was looking for a horrifying story about white male privilege, a gruesome rape, a apathetic college reaction. She went looking for it...and gosh darn if she didn't just find it!
> 
> Every year there is news about some Social Justice Warrior in college faking racial slurs painted on their door, or a hacked Facebook account, or something.
> 
> My favorite Twitter post "It seems a Rolling Stone also gathers no evidence."


"Journalism" is a cesspool. There have been very few journalists who actually follow any kind of code of ethics.


----------



## Anon Pink

Shoto1984 said:


> *Anon I said this : So when women have grabbed my back side I was being sexually assaulted in that I hadn't given consent. I never thought of myself as a victim but wrong is wrong. Hmmmm.
> 
> And got this...*
> 
> 
> 
> *I found it completely out of line. I don't have a wife but I have two young daughters and I would quite literally die for them (as I'm sure most of us would).*


Okay Shoto, thanks for responding.

You felt that since your backside being groped was A) sexual assault and B) you didn't feel assaulted, therefore the inference is that women ought not feel offended when their backsides get groped? 

That is the way I read it so if I misinterpreted your meaning please correct me.

Then when EleGirl asked how you would feel if your wife or daughters had their backsides groped you took offense. 

I have to admit I'm missing a piece and not understanding where the offense came from.

You stated a situation didn't offend you, yet were offended when asked if that same situation happening to your daughters might offend you.


----------



## Anon Pink

Can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE not turn this thread into a false reporting tit for tat? Please?


----------



## Shoto1984

EleGirl said:


> I was not suggesting that this should happened to your wife (were you married) or your daughters. I was asking what yoru reaction would be. The point was that while you don't mind having your backside grabbed, many other people do. And we were not talking about backside, we were talking about groping even more personal body parts.


And I explained that you took my statement and applied a wrong interpretation to it so why are you restating something you know to be incorrect?

The actual point was that maybe if men understood and saw themselves as victims too, they would be better able to put themselves in a woman's shoes. Thus the issue of fairness in men sexually assaulting women and women sexually assaulting men. I also explained that I have only used the "backside" as an example and that I, and many men, have been touched/grapped everywhere which is another part you continue to restate incorrectly. 

This is one of those times when a little apology is way better then throwing up the defense.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> Can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE not turn this thread into a false reporting tit for tat? Please?


No worries.

As I stated, we need to identify the rationalizations that and the logic that a man follows to justify his leering at/groping/raping a woman, and point out HOW it is a bunch of incorrect assumptions and also how destructive revelation of his being a leerer/groper/rapist will be to his self interest.

The solution, which I am advancing with much trepidation because of how activists like Ederly will run with it, is that we need to get a touch harder on sexual assault.

From what little reading I've done on this issue, the little boys start teasing, touching and bothering girls...and they escalate until Bad Things Happen. Break that chain earlier and you can hopefully bend the branch back to the straight.

Why am I full of trepidation in advancing that idea? Because rape is a horrible thing. Because it leaves mental scars. And those scarred people try very hard to be the drivers of how we treat rapists.

And frankly, the message I, as a male, get from Feminism toward rapists/gropers/sexual harassers/guys who look at cleavage just a bit too much than THEY feel is appropriate, is "F**k You! You are pond scum forever! We hope you DIE!"

(Ahem...unless you are an ex President who happens to pass the Family Leave Act, in which case feminists say :smthumbup: Sorry AP, feminism _really_ deserves that black eye they self inflicted)

So giving rape activists MORE ammunition to go after boys who make mistakes early? Very much not comfortable with that because I am interested in educating them and rehabilitating them, not engaging in what frequently feels like a man shaming witch...excuse me warlock hunt which is bound to an absolute zero tolerance policy.

So in some cases, Anon Pink, there are trust issues between the two sides.


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD, I agree that perhaps rape victims might not be in the best chair for deciding fate. However...However...JCD, you can ignore that history of victim blaming which meant victims were triple traumatized while the rapists walked away with the support of the wronged party. So yes, mistrust is huge here!

I don't believe that women or feminists in particular think men who leer at women are pond scum. Once again, JCD, history has shown that it is not until women start burning SH!t down that things begin to change. So instead of discounting the points being made, how about making attempts to hear the points being made?

I find people generally stop being so vociferous in their complaints once they feel heard? Have you noticed that too?

The suggestion you made is a good one I think. Let's not allow boys to be boys. Let's challenge them to be more mannerly as we teach them to be gentlemen. Let's teach them there is wonderful things to be had when sex is a mutually shared event. Let's give them the words they need to communicate their desire and let's give them support to keep seeking until they find a woman who can own her sexuality and decisions.


----------



## JCD

Anon Pink said:


> JCD, I agree that perhaps rape victims might not be in the best chair for deciding fate. However...However...JCD, you can ignore that history of victim blaming which meant victims were triple traumatized while the rapists walked away with the support of the wronged party. So yes, mistrust is huge here!
> 
> I don't believe that women or feminists in particular think men who leer at women are pond scum. Once again, JCD, history has shown that it is not until women start burning SH!t down that things begin to change. So instead of discounting the points being made, how about making attempts to hear the points being made?
> 
> I find people generally stop being so vociferous in their complaints once they feel heard? Have you noticed that too?
> 
> The suggestion you made is a good one I think. Let's not allow boys to be boys. Let's challenge them to be more mannerly as we teach them to be gentlemen. Let's teach them there is wonderful things to be had when sex is a mutually shared event. Let's give them the words they need to communicate their desire and let's give them support to keep seeking until they find a woman who can own her sexuality and decisions.



You make an excellent point about 'being heard'. As I was reading about that 'tangent topic' which we will not discuss here, having listened to the ladies here, I couldn't help but think: depending on which side you are on, you could see this as either some guys being railroaded, or this as classic victim blaming. And really, why choose one?

By gender and nature, I have a bias toward one point of view and I am an activist for that side...though I try to be a fair one.

As far as 'listening' about leering, yeah. I have listened. And some of the women here are very brutal about a guy, any guy, who leers at them. And a 'leer' is in the mind of the beholder. A 'leer' isn't a 'leer' if it sparks chick wood (Schwing!) Then is it 'sexual confidence'. To many of them, leer almost = rapist. No joke, one thread had some ladies commiserating with a woman whose husband 'looked' at another woman too long. Every one felt that a vast berating of the man was the absolute minimum. I think the D word was bandied about by some of the more extreme members.

But I get where you are coming from.

Every guy here will tell you that crimes like sexual harassment, sexual assault of any kind (being 18 and dating 16) etc, is impossible to recover from. I could beat a man over the head and steal his wallet, get caught, do my time and STILL have a better chance of rehabilitating my image than if I got canned for sexual harassment at work.

So when we approach this, I would very much like to point out 'label slapping' on our young men is something to be done VERY hesitantly...including for THEIR self image. If they constantly see themselves as 'that pervert', we might twist that branch in the wrong direction.

Education WITH understanding and forgiveness.


----------



## MaritimeGuy

Faithful Wife said:


> "But asking is a boner killer!" WAHHHH!!!!


So is asking about protection as well. Which, as an aside, is probably going to ascertain consent at the same time...


----------



## Anon Pink

JCD said:


> You make an excellent point about 'being heard'. As I was reading about that 'tangent topic' which we will not discuss here, having listened to the ladies here, I couldn't help but think: depending on which side you are on, you could see this as either some guys being railroaded, or this as classic victim blaming. And really, why choose one?
> 
> By gender and nature, I have a bias toward one point of view and I am an activist for that side...though I try to be a fair one.
> 
> As far as 'listening' about leering, yeah. I have listened. And some of the women here are very brutal about a guy, any guy, who leers at them. And a 'leer' is in the mind of the beholder. A 'leer' isn't a 'leer' if it sparks chick wood (Schwing!) Then is it 'sexual confidence'. To many of them, leer almost = rapist. No joke, one thread had some ladies commiserating with a woman whose husband 'looked' at another woman too long. Every one felt that a vast berating of the man was the absolute minimum. I think the D word was bandied about by some of the more extreme members.
> 
> But I get where you are coming from.
> 
> Every guy here will tell you that crimes like sexual harassment, sexual assault of any kind (being 18 and dating 16) etc, is impossible to recover from. I could beat a man over the head and steal his wallet, get caught, do my time and STILL have a better chance of rehabilitating my image than if I got canned for sexual harassment at work.
> 
> So when we approach this, I would very much like to point out 'label slapping' on our young men is something to be done VERY hesitantly...including for THEIR self image. If they constantly see themselves as 'that pervert', we might twist that branch in the wrong direction.
> 
> Education WITH understanding and forgiveness.



I am completely on board with all of this!

Next time you see a thread in which women are preparing to hang, draw, and quarter a man for leering, lemme know? One of the best things about being my age is the perspective it brings to some of these situations. 

I have seen several threads about women being absurdly and stupidly jealous but haven't seen any about being leered at.


----------



## Deejo

*Re: Re: Teach sons not to rape. How?*



Faithful Wife said:


> "But asking is a boner killer!" WAHHHH!!!!


I remember one very specific incident in college. I was in bed with a girl. We were both drunk. Clothes came off. We were about to have intercourse and she said, "No."

I said, "That's ok." and rolled off her. She said she didn't want to be perceived as loose, and thought I would tell all my friends about getting lucky, and I'd never talk to her again. She even got teary.

I replied, that really it was ok and we could just sleep.

I started to doze off. I then became aware that she had climbed on board and was going to town.

I never told my friends. She never talked to me again.

This isn't fiction. This really happened to me.

I don't believe I was raped. I remember almost nothing about the sex other than we had it.

But ... change my gender, and it becomes far less cut and dry.


----------



## JCD

> Originally Posted by Faithful Wife
> "But asking is a boner killer!" WAHHHH!!!!


One gender can be turned on by a stiff breeze.

The other gender takes the alignment of Venus, an uptick in the stock market, three glasses of chardonnay and having a 'good ass' day to get into the mood.

It would be nice we could have honest conversations about 'consent' without the fickle and transient nature of a woman's libido pretty much assuring the self destruction of the moment.

Anecdote:

My friend met this girl. They are in the kitchen. They were having a conversation. Things were getting...intimate, i.e. they were both edging toward each other, they were both very comfortable with each other and attracted to one another. 

His brother comes into the kitchen: "Dude, I need to get some Dew!"

BAM! He is back to zero. HE still wanted to kiss her. She...did not. The existence of another human being was enough to derail her entire sense of attraction.

So sure...blame it all on the men.


----------



## MaritimeGuy

Deejo said:


> I remember one very specific incident in college. I was in bed with a girl. We were both drunk. Clothes came off. We were about to have intercourse and she said, "No."
> 
> I said, "That's ok." and rolled off her. She said she didn't want to be perceived as loose, and thought I would tell all my friends about getting lucky, and I'd never talk to her again. She even got teary.
> 
> I replied, that really it was ok and we could just sleep.
> 
> I started to doze off. I then became aware that she had climbed on board and was going to town.
> 
> I never told my friends. She never talked to me again.
> 
> This isn't fiction. This really happened to me.
> 
> I don't believe I was raped. I remember almost nothing about the sex other than we had it.
> 
> But ... change my gender, and it becomes far less cut and dry.


I don't know that changing genders does in fact make it cut and dry. You could have chosen to have felt taken advantage of and raised a stink. True you probably wouldn't be looked at the same by Joe average (many probably see an erect penis as 'implied consent') but in all seriousness you would have every bit as much right to be offended. You chose not to be.


----------



## Cletus

MaritimeGuy said:


> True you probably wouldn't be looked at the same by Joe average (many probably see an erect penis as 'implied consent') but in all seriousness you would have every bit as much right to be offended. You chose not to be.


I don't know about you, but I don't choose those things about which I am offended. They come whether I want them to or not. Quite the contrary, in fact. I have to remember to not be offended about things that are not truly offensive.

If Deejo wasn't offended, that's a pretty good indicator that he didn't find the whole thing offensive.


----------



## NobodySpecial

I think it is interesting how many posts are around things that are not really rapey, very unlikely for anyone to constitute as rape. No one wants to talk about situations like mine where I was held down by my throat do I could not breath. Or the girl that was passed out cold, with no prior sexual relationship ever before or that evening when a guy just pulled her pants off and stuck it in.

I can tell you for a certainty that I would have been asked, what was I wearing. What did I do to encourage it. How do you encourage rape when you are asleep in your pjs? With whom had I had sex in the past? How did he know you won't give it up to him? Why didn't you say No.

I am kinda sickened by the flavor of these many discussions lately. But I do also have to wonder what it has to do with marriage? Hopefully not a hell of a lot!


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> I think it is interesting how many posts are around things that are not really rapey, very unlikely for anyone to constitute as rape. No one wants to talk about situations like mine where I was held down by my throat do I could not breath.


People aren't talking about this, because it isn't what this thread is about. What happened to you is RAPE. No discussion needed. Guy who did this should be in jail for a long, long time.



> Or the girl that was passed out cold, with no prior sexual relationship ever before or that evening when a guy just pulled her pants off and stuck it in.


Not very much different than what Deejo said happened to him.



> I can tell you for a certainty that I would have been asked, what was I wearing. What did I do to encourage it. How do you encourage rape when you are asleep in your pjs? With whom had I had sex in the past? How did he know you won't give it up to him? Why didn't you say No.
> 
> I am kinda sickened by the flavor of these many discussions lately. But I do also have to wonder what it has to do with marriage? Hopefully not a hell of a lot!


All those questions are meant to ensure justice is done. To ensure that what happened was rape. It is to ensure that someone doesn't go to jail for a rape that they didn't commit rape. I agree that some of them are hurtful to someone that was just victimized. But I am sure you would hate for your son to get charged with rape that he didn't commit.


----------



## NobodySpecial

SadSamIAm said:


> Not very much different than what Deejo said happened to him.


I am not sure I agree. Deejo had previously consented with his actions. (I am not of the boat that the ONLY legally acceptable consent is a verbal Yes. I think that is dumb.) I suppose he would have had a case, maybe. But I don't think this hinges on either being drunk or being male or female when drunk. She very clearly said no. He didn't.



> All those questions are meant to ensure justice is done.


Why are they relevant? Do you ask the victim of a robbery what he was doing in the neighborhood when attempting to prosecute the robber?




> To ensure that what happened was rape.


What possible relevance could my previous sexual history or what I was wearing have on someone with whom I had no relationship



> It is to ensure that someone doesn't go to jail for a rape that they didn't commit rape. I agree that some of them are hurtful to someone that was just victimized.


It is not hurtful. It is irrelevant. It should be illegal. Unless it is about past relationships between the two of them as it relates to an expectation of consent that was not changed then it Has None Whatsoever. There will come a day. Ok I don't really believe this. But I HOPE there will be a day that some ass hats don't take attire as a person invitation to them. Cuz it shouldn't be.

It is an intentional shame and scare tactic specifically designed to keep victims out of the court house.


----------



## Cletus

NobodySpecial said:


> It is not hurtful. It is irrelevant. It should be illegal. Unless it is about past relationships between the two of them as it relates to an expectation of consent that was not changed then it Has None Whatsoever. There will come a day. Ok I don't really believe this. But I HOPE there will be a day that some ass hats don't take attire as a person invitation to them. Cuz it shouldn't be.
> 
> It is an intentional shame and scare tactic specifically designed to keep victims out of the court house.


I couldn't agree more. The only place those kinds of questions have is in research into the probability of getting raped. 

For instance, in the 1-in-5 college assault statistic, which was a fabricated number, it was implicitly assumed that every rape was statistically independent from every other rape - that there were no places on campus where rape was more prevalent, that there were no behaviors like excessive drinking shared by the victims, and that any girl was as likely a target as any other.

None of this should ever be used in a court case to decide fault, but they should absolutely be communicated to women who want to reduce their statistical exposure as much as possible.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ikaika said:


> Is this the same as implied consent?


Implied consent is consent, yes. The latter woman was engaging in a sexual activity with the man. Consent to remove her shirt is implied. If she does not actually consent, she must say no, or otherwise deny or resist his advance. If she does not, he has every reason to believe she consents, given the previous sexual behavior.

You cannot have two cases with the exact same scenario, where one is rape and the other is not simply for what is going on in HER head. He is not in her head. Denying implied consent, means any case is instantaneously rape the moment a woman decides it is, without giving ANY indication to the man that the advances are no longer welcome.

The only objective, reliable and just definition of rape is that which can be recognized by both parties. You don't get to imply consent, then do nothing, and it be rape.



Ikaika said:


> I guess this is where I'm having difficulty. Removing her blouse in one case is a "no no" but in the other it is implied consent? I guess I'm having a hard time making the direct connection. I could think of a number of reasons why she is remaining silent over de-robing her let alone assume sex. I'm sorry, I still see this as an opinion on your part and none of the legal links have yet to convince me otherwise.


Let's be honest. God himself couldn't convince you otherwise.

The former case does not imply consent, because that woman is not engaged in a sexual activity with the man. The latter woman is.

I've shown you the legal definition of implied consent, and I've shown you how a reasonable person would believe consent to escalate sexual activity is implied by engaging in sexual activity. If she doesn't want to go further than he believes she has indicated, she must say no. No jury is going to convict a man of rape if she's a participant in a sexual act, then becomes passive, without presenting any resistance.



Ikaika said:


> I have no issue with this, but I believe it is just as important to teach both boys and girls on this issue.


And per your understanding, you're only lesson to boys must be that "at any moment, regardless of anything she's already done, she may decide it's rape without giving you any indication. Good luck!"

There's really nothing additional to teach boys. No means no and he stops the advance. Whether she has already given express consent or implied consent is honestly irrelevant (both are consent) if she wishes to change the status quo. Her wanting to revoke any consent, including if she previously gave express consent, CANNOT be passive. SHE must act, otherwise a reasonable person can be judged to believe they wish to continue.

We can't read your minds. Raise girls to be confident in asserting their limits rather than requiring boys to be psychic throughout sex, because again, any type of consent can be revoked at any time. I refuse any definition that holds that this revocation can be entirely in her head. Such a definition is arbitrary and unjust, making him a rapist the moment she simply thinks it so, with no unambiguous indication to him.


----------



## Ikaika

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Implied consent is consent, yes. The latter woman was engaging in a sexual activity with the man. Consent to remove her shirt is implied. If she does not actually consent, she must say no, or otherwise deny or resist his advance. If she does not, he has every reason to believe she consents, given the previous sexual behavior.
> 
> 
> 
> You cannot have two cases with the exact same scenario, where one is rape and the other is not simply for what is going on in HER head. He is not in her head. Denying implied consent, means any case is instantaneously rape the moment a woman decides it is, without giving ANY indication to the man that the advances are no longer welcome.
> 
> 
> 
> The only objective, reliable and just definition of rape is that which can be recognized by both parties. You don't get to imply consent, then do nothing, and it be rape.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's be honest. God himself couldn't convince you otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> The former case does not imply consent, because that woman is not engaged in a sexual activity with the man. The latter woman is.
> 
> 
> 
> I've shown you the legal definition of implied consent, and I've shown you how a reasonable person would believe consent to escalate sexual activity is implied by engaging in sexual activity. If she doesn't want to go further than he believes she has indicated, she must say no. No jury is going to convict a man of rape if she's a participant in a sexual act, then becomes passive, without presenting any resistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And per your understanding, you're only lesson to boys must be that "at any moment, regardless of anything she's already done, she may decide it's rape without giving you any indication. Good luck!"
> 
> 
> 
> There's really nothing additional to teach boys. No means no and he stops the advance. Whether she has already given express consent or implied consent is honestly irrelevant (both are consent) if she wishes to change the status quo. Her wanting to revoke any consent, including if she previously gave express consent, CANNOT be passive. SHE must act, otherwise a reasonable person can be judged to believe they wish to continue.
> 
> 
> 
> We can't read your minds. Raise girls to be confident in asserting their limits rather than requiring boys to be psychic throughout sex, because again, any type of consent can be revoked at any time. I refuse any definition that holds that this revocation can be entirely in her head. Such a definition is arbitrary and unjust, making him a rapist the moment she simply thinks it so, with no unambiguous indication to him.



I've read your legal definition links. Let's just say I'm glad I'm not a prosecutor or a defense attorney.

My lesson to my sons... I think I will show them the YouTube video linked earlier. Lacie ?


----------



## NobodySpecial

Ikaika said:


> My lesson to my sons... I think I will show them the YouTube video linked earlier. Lacie ?


My lesson to my son is read Dvl and don't be that guy. Just gross.


----------



## Ikaika

NobodySpecial said:


> My lesson to my son is read Dvl and don't be that guy. Just gross.


Your opinion, my thoughts may differ a little. I think this video hits the target in today's society.


----------



## SadSamIAm

NobodySpecial said:


> I am not sure I agree. Deejo had previously consented with his actions. (I am not of the boat that the ONLY legally acceptable consent is a verbal Yes. I think that is dumb.) I suppose he would have had a case, maybe. But I don't think this hinges on either being drunk or being male or female when drunk. She very clearly said no. He didn't.


I actually agree with you here. But many have been saying that there needs to be a Ýes for there to be consent. I agree that is dumb.




> Why are they relevant? Do you ask the victim of a robbery what he was doing in the neighborhood when attempting to prosecute the robber?


They might have to ask these questions if the robber is saying he didn't steal anything. That the 'victim' actually gave the robber the things he 'allegedley' stole. 





> What possible relevance could my previous sexual history or what I was wearing have on someone with whom I had no relationship
> 
> 
> It is not hurtful. It is irrelevant. It should be illegal. Unless it is about past relationships between the two of them as it relates to an expectation of consent that was not changed then it Has None Whatsoever. There will come a day. Ok I don't really believe this. But I HOPE there will be a day that some ass hats don't take attire as a person invitation to them. Cuz it shouldn't be.
> 
> It is an intentional shame and scare tactic specifically designed to keep victims out of the court house.


It isn't always apparent. How do they know if you have a sexual history with someone if they don't ask. Maybe the 'rapist' is telling the police that he has known you for years and has had sex with you before.

EDIT - I re-read what you wrote. I agree that any questions about your sexual history not related to the two of you doesn't need to be asked. What you were wearing wasn't relevent either.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> It is not hurtful. It is irrelevant. It should be illegal. Unless it is about past relationships between the two of them as it relates to an expectation of consent that was not changed then it Has None Whatsoever.


Most states have shield laws that prevent her sexual history from being admissible. These laws are highly controversial, as they deny defendants evidence of intent. In other crimes, history is admissible to demonstrate intent.

http://www.lawriter.net/cgi-bin/tex...wwxFqED1pntpm8cXsvBGDoBzoVtnzpps/bvindex.html



> According to the federal rules of evidence:
> (b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts. - Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.


So you can't bring up history to show that this is probably another example, but you could use history to prove some element of fact or credibility demonstrated by history. ie Going to a sex party demonstrates intent, and may imply consent. To void that intent and implied consent, she may say, "I didn't know it was a sex party!" The defense would like to present evidence that she attended and participated in the last one held by the host, but wouldn't be permitted to because of shield laws.

Shield laws render such evidence inadmissible in rape cases, despite being admissible in all other cases. Willfully denying defendants the due process to which they would be entitled in any other case. Most interesting, is that his history of sexual assault may still be admissible by the normal rules of evidence even though hers is not by statute.

Sound fair?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> My lesson to my son is read Dvl and don't be that guy. Just gross.


I'll take that as a sign you don't have a counter argument.

Don't be like me. Be psychic. :smthumbup:


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Most states have shield laws that prevent her sexual history from being admissible. These laws are highly controversial, as they deny defendants evidence of intent. In other crimes, history is admissible to demonstrate intent.
> 
> http://www.lawriter.net/cgi-bin/tex...wwxFqED1pntpm8cXsvBGDoBzoVtnzpps/bvindex.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you can't bring up history to show that this is probably another example, but you could use history to prove some element of fact or credibility demonstrated by history. ie Going to a sex party demonstrates intent, and may imply consent.
> 
> 
> 
> Two things. In the past, bringing the very fact that a woman had a sexual history was evidence enough of her interest, forget about interest in him on that occaision.
> 
> Furthermore there SHOULD be no implied consent. The only thing being consented to would be attendance at the party. AFAIC that should be LAW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To void that intent and implied consent, she may say, "I didn't know it was a sex party!" The defense would like to present evidence that she attended and participated in the last one held by the host, but wouldn't be permitted to because of shield laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think that is dandy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shield laws render such evidence inadmissible in rape cases, despite being admissible in all other cases. Willfully denying defendants the due process to which they would be entitled in any other case. Most interesting, is that his history of sexual assault may still be admissible by the normal rules of evidence even though hers is not by statute.
> 
> Sound fair?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yup. Because none of them have anything to do with either intent in the individual situation or the facts of the case.
Click to expand...


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I'll take that as a sign you don't have a counter argument.
> 
> Don't be like me. Be psychic. :smthumbup:


I have shared my opinions quite a lot on this thread. So I am good. But it is true, I do hold up some of your posts to him about how not the be "that guy".


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Faithful Wife said:


> "But asking is a boner killer!" WAHHHH!!!!


Irrelevant.

I've tried to demonstrate how the nature of the consent doesn't matter.

Let's presume your wonderful boner killing man explicitly asks and she expressly consents. He then removes her pants or touches her in the way that caused Anon to freeze, and for the same reasons, she's freezes up. It was ok as a word, but as an action... she panics. She changes her mind. She doesn't want to do this. But in her panic, she is passive. Has express consent changed anything? No.

By the definition of rape being trotted here, this is also date rape. So at any moment, a woman can become passive and the man is a rapist. Sheer nonsense.

Things have changed only in her mind. Such a definition entitles women to declare men rapists at will, with no change in behavior of the man. That is an entirely subjective definition regardless of the form of the consent. Given the exact same actions, one cannot be a crime and the other not, simply by what's going on in HER mind.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Irrelevant.
> 
> I've tried to demonstrate how the nature of the consent doesn't matter.
> 
> Let's presume your wonderful boner killing man explicitly asks and she expressly consents. He then removes her pants or touches her in the way that caused Anon to freeze, and for the same reasons, she's freezes up. It was ok as a word, but as an action... she panics. She changes her mind. She doesn't want to do this. But in her panic, she is passive. Has express consent changed anything? No.


I agree with this as a matter of law. Not so much as a moral matter for a grown up human being. But then I am not in the camp that a verbal yes is the only clear mechanism for sex. I am pretty sure my husband is certain of my consent. 

That said, I would suggest greater care to my young son as he matures into situations where he might be less sure and confident.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> I have shared my opinions quite a lot on this thread. So I am good. But it is true, I do hold up some of your posts to him about how not the be "that guy".


Your opinion appears to make any man a rapist at a woman's whim (I haven't read the whole thread, so forgive if I'm mischaracterizing... this thread progresses faster than I have time to read). As an example, it's like me letting someone borrow my tools, but a moment later, I decide I don't want to lend them. I'm unable to assert myself by asking to have them given back, so I call it theft.

It's not something we should encourage of girls by teaching boys to assume responsibility for her.

Is it really so hard to teach girls to stand up for *themselves*?

Maybe I should rethink my stance on equality.

I agree that the legal matter is different from the emotional matter, but not a moral matter. Rape is a legal matter. All "rape" that is not rape as a matter of law, is some other emotional negativity a la regret. It is not in fact rape - which has been my point all along. It's similarly problematic to declare it a moral matter. In the specific circumstances being discussed, he can't possibly know that he's in the wrong. If the only indication is her passivity, and many women are happily passive, then implied consent must exist and there is no indicator of immoral action. What goes on in her head doesn't change the objective facts and no standard of rape can be entirely within her head. If she rejects the situation, she must act, not just lie there.

It sucks that she panicked and froze, and I can see how she'd carry it as an emotional negative, but it's still entirely on her.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Your opinion makes any man a rapist at a woman's whim.


You may be mistaking me for other posters. Or you can't read. But I knew that from previous threads.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> Two things. In the past, bringing the very fact that a woman had a sexual history was evidence enough of her interest, forget about interest in him on that occaision.


Untrue. Advocates of shield laws simply believe it would prejudice a jury. Existing rules of evidence still apply to a woman's sexual history though, just as they do to all other cases. It is not admissible as evidence that she did or did not consent to the act in question. As I pointed out, the relevance of history is limited under the regular rules of evidence. Shield laws throw history out entirely arbitrarily and unreasonably, unlike all other cases. What holds for all other cases ought to apply to rape. The rights of defendants ought not change case by case. Perhaps you're forgetting that our system is one of presumed innocent until proven guilty and equal due process.



NobodySpecial said:


> Furthermore there SHOULD be no implied consent. The only thing being consented to would be attendance at the party. AFAIC that should be LAW.


I said "may". All of the facts surrounding the sex act are considered. This party example wasn't to demonstrate implied consent, but an example of proper use of sexual history. In the example, her using "I didn't know it was a sex party" and being refuted by her history of participation gets to her lack of credibility, in addition to intent. It *may* also be a factor in deciding implied consent (it's all up to the jury). Of course, none of that happens in states with shield laws. The defendant is unable to make that point. So our sex partier remains a naïve innocent rather than a seeker of sexual activity. There would obviously need to be more to the case and this would only be one element in the defense - but a fairly compelling element unjustly denied to the defense.

Practically speaking, implied consent must exist regardless. Past express consent doesn't constitute current express consent for example. Consensual Sex in a relationship is almost entirely based on implied consent. There's really no *practical* way of completely eliminating implied consent from our lives. Express consent sex is literally a parody of actual sex had - it would require asking every time (either blanket across all acts, per act, or with exceptions). And it still fails to address the root problem of this thread, passive women who can't speak up for themselves. Just because you expressly consented, doesn't mean you won't want to withdraw that consent, and your freezing would still make him a rapist per the unwieldy definition being bandied about.



NobodySpecial said:


> I think that is dandy.


Of course you do. You're a woman. Such laws favor you, even if you're lying through your teeth.



NobodySpecial said:


> Yup. Because none of them have anything to do with either intent in the individual situation or the facts of the case.


Can you re-read that? His history may be admissible, while hers is automatically inadmissible. You really think that's fair? I hope you misread. Otherwise, *mind* *blown*.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

NobodySpecial said:


> You may be mistaking me for other posters. Or you can't read. But I knew that from previous threads.


I know a few things about you from previous threads too. But describing it in a word gets me banned. At least you're consistent with something.


----------



## NobodySpecial

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Untrue. Advocates of shield laws simply believe it would prejudice a jury.


Not this advocate. This advocate just told you why she advocates for what she does.




> Of course you do. You're a woman. Such laws favor you, even if you're lying through your teeth.


Right. Because I never advocate for men's rights or social justice on threads. I am just a woman so either feeble or a liar.




> Can you re-read that? His history may be admissible, while hers is automatically inadmissible. You really think that's fair? I hope you misread. Otherwise, *mind* *blown*.


That is not what I read in that segment at all. You like to make stuff up. Peace out.


----------

