Very scary time for young men in America

[JoeBleed]

Honestly dude, I can't be bothered with your routine any longer. You accuse me of something, I ask you to show where I've said that, you come up with zero as usual. I accuse you of something, you deflect as usual or double-down even in the most petty of circumstances, or even more bizarrely, you decide to say, "no, it's you doing that!".

Assumptions: What you're not understanding (or pretend not to), is that if you make an unsupported assumption about my position and I tell you that's wrong and tell you what my position actually is (or vice versa), that should be the end of it. However, you then compound your error by doubling-down and saying you think your assumption is still correct despite the fact that I've already told you it's not, while throwing some other incorrect assumptions into the mix. You then claim that my position is that no-one else can make assumptions but me.

Your next post (#248) even repeats shit that you assert to be my position despite the fact that I've already given you sufficient clarification to correct your mistaken assumption that you then choose to ignore. Then you side-stepped most of what I've said, while adding "post sex regret" to the list of list of your still conflicting arguments (they're not "what ifs", they constitute your need to invent more information to suit your opinion about the story as a whole being false in some way... any way! it just has to be false!). The one scenario where you vaguely entertain the notion that she's speaking the truth is the one where you assert that you would have paid attention to her consent withdrawal but it still doesn't count for some reason, because even in that scenario you'd rather believe that she's lying while also speaking the truth.

Re: my "rape / paedo apologist" comment: Yes, I could see how that could be taken as an ad hominem, but say if someone is being racist, I call them racist, just like I call a spade a spade. People coming straight out with responses along the lines of "false rape allegation" and "not a real rape" with no justification whatsoever is basically being an apologist. I will apologise in one respect for that post being that IMO it was unnecessarily incendiary and therefore not conducive to a reasoned discussion. However, calling someone a pansy because you don't like their argument is a pure and pointless ad hominem.

I think what you either fundamentally and truthfully misunderstand (or wilfully ignore) is that my position (probably Blackjack200's and darkswordsman's too) is that, taking her story at face value, then technically she was raped; it was non-consensual sex, end of point (without making any kind of baseless assertion regarding its veracity because there's know way to judge or know as there is no other evidence). I honestly don't see the point in pissing about with the "what ifs" in this situation because what's the point. Take that story, being the only story available and say what you think about it, without modifying it to suit your perspective. Otherwise you've got one person saying "what if he did re-seek consent?" and the opposing argument saying, "what if he clamped his hand over her mouth after she said it?": It's a pointless waste of time.

I'm done arguing with you. Reply again if you like, but I won't bother responding.

yea, this is what i expected. bla bla bla bla. some old crap. say you said something, say i said something else and that i accused you of saying something and not providing proof. the proof is in the quotes. people can read it. What i've said was consistent. you made a whole post where you essentially change your statement to match myself and others that don't blindly believe in the statement in question.

The pissing about the what ifs and not taking just her story at face value is the whole point. if you take her story at face value as you just said, you're ignoring the other side of the story and other possibilities. as in, it was consentual and then latter down the line she regretted it and decided to declare it rape. That's a big difference and potential problem for the other party. The apparent agreement there is no way to judge is the reason agreeing she was raped isn't happening and why others disagree. As for "what if he clamped his hands over her mouth after she said it", that's a valid question. but considering she was writing about being raped, you'd think she would include that as it would help her argument a lot. but she didn't. Still a possibility; but we don't know.

You keep saying this is a forum and not a court of law. That's true, but when someone wants to make such a claim of rape and post it publicly(a book she wrote), it will still be judged by everyone that reads it. yourself included. I'm not sure why you seem to think this isn't the case. you judged it and formed your opinion and then posted that publicly. then others posted theirs about the story and your opinions. Surprise surprise people have differing opinions. These aren't judgments of law as if we all think we're in court, it's judgment as in people reading it, processing it based on their on life experience and forming their opinion.

 

[momeNt]

Uhh, what? Did you quote the wrong post or something? What you said has nothing to do with what you quoted.

Try this. Im just asking you the question based on your last couple of responses in this thread, that was the last one, but this is more fitting.

This. When you're having sex with someone you respond to what the other person is saying and what they're doing. As a man, you're always cognizant of the fact that you're much larger than them, and capable of hurting them. Especially if you're 17 and they're 14. It's insane to hear a woman say "I don't think this is going to work" and do anything but immediately stop and find out what's wrong. Goddamn insane.

You aren't really picking a side here which is why i'm asking.