Search Results
6/15/2025, 7:33:32 PM
>>935815432
>You said it like that because feminists frequently conflate the two and, at best, you've adopted their bad habits.
No, I said it because rape is a form of SA and SA is a more encompassing term.
>So are you saying that the major issue facing women in regards to the crime of rape is that they frequently enter shitty areas of cities/towns, go down dark alleyways, run into people built like pro-NFL players, and have found themselves in a situation where only the two of them are there with nobody else around?
No, it was a thought experiment.
>That conversation to ascertain that info would never happen. This was some rando on the street, no? ... nobody is going to find him. The cops aren't going to canvas the area to recoup a stolen $50. You're not even going to get to the stage to retain a lawyer to depose the guy who's never going to be brought in.
OK, you're avoiding answering the question I posed thought experiment.
I think most people would say they felt under duress, even though there was not explicit threat or use of violence. Simply this stronger person would not take no for an answer
>You're the one who brought up law.
Yes, that doesn't mean legality is all this is about.
>The funny thing about ethical standards is that without the law behind them they're just platitudes. Not only that, but ethics vary. Moreover, most people are operating from the framework of moral relativism which means you might have ethical standard A in which women say no and that there is the red line in the sand, but also might be cognizant that in Morocco there's ethical standard B in which if a rapist rapes and is caught? Well then the rapist damaged the goods of the girl and now has to pony up. Without an objective standard of ethics, how does one actually have the grounds to say Morocco is doing anything wrong?
Do you have the standard that consent for sex acts is a good?
I'm not asking if it's objectively good, I'm asking for your personal standard.
>You said it like that because feminists frequently conflate the two and, at best, you've adopted their bad habits.
No, I said it because rape is a form of SA and SA is a more encompassing term.
>So are you saying that the major issue facing women in regards to the crime of rape is that they frequently enter shitty areas of cities/towns, go down dark alleyways, run into people built like pro-NFL players, and have found themselves in a situation where only the two of them are there with nobody else around?
No, it was a thought experiment.
>That conversation to ascertain that info would never happen. This was some rando on the street, no? ... nobody is going to find him. The cops aren't going to canvas the area to recoup a stolen $50. You're not even going to get to the stage to retain a lawyer to depose the guy who's never going to be brought in.
OK, you're avoiding answering the question I posed thought experiment.
I think most people would say they felt under duress, even though there was not explicit threat or use of violence. Simply this stronger person would not take no for an answer
>You're the one who brought up law.
Yes, that doesn't mean legality is all this is about.
>The funny thing about ethical standards is that without the law behind them they're just platitudes. Not only that, but ethics vary. Moreover, most people are operating from the framework of moral relativism which means you might have ethical standard A in which women say no and that there is the red line in the sand, but also might be cognizant that in Morocco there's ethical standard B in which if a rapist rapes and is caught? Well then the rapist damaged the goods of the girl and now has to pony up. Without an objective standard of ethics, how does one actually have the grounds to say Morocco is doing anything wrong?
Do you have the standard that consent for sex acts is a good?
I'm not asking if it's objectively good, I'm asking for your personal standard.
Page 1