can we have a thread about rape?
in what percentage of "rape" cases do you think a woman is actually legitimately held down by a man she does not want to have sex with and forced through the act against her will?
maybe 1/10000 rapes are legitimate rapes
>>24847738
>can we have a thread about rape?
hello /b/
how often do girls resist a guy trying to pull her pants down or whatever, but then ends up having sex with him anyways and DON'T view this as rape?
asking the chadbots on here because ive never had sex with a girl or even come close.
>>24847821
i guess i could rephrase that as
is it typical when trying to hook up with a girl you just met for her to just let you have sex with her or do they resist?
I don't see why robots defend rapists.
"Rape" doesn't have to be at the level of "physically holding down some fully-garbed innocent young virgin while she screams for help".
For example, sex can start out consensual, but then turn into rape. Just because a woman said she initially wanted to have sex, it doesn't mean that she consented to anything and everything the rapist might do with/to her. If two people are having sex, and the rapist decides to pin the girl down, choke her, and restrain her, despite her clearly telling him to stop, that is rape. It isn't that "she's secretly asking for it" and that "women like dominant men". Similarly, if someone changes their mind in the course of sex, and decides they want to stop, the other can't say "no no! you agreed to sex so I get another 15 minutes". A person can immediately terminate their consent.
As well, it may be that wearing slutty clothing likens the prospect of getting raped. Yet that woman has a right to wear what she wants, within the confines of public decency laws. The rapist doesn't have a right to rape. This shouldn't be hard to understand.Just because she risks a higher likelihood of rape going out to a bar in a short skirt, rather than locking herself in her closet with a shotgun and full burqa, it doesn't mean she "deserves it" if she didn't take every unreasonable precaution possible.
>>24847942
>A person can immediately terminate their consent.
get the fuck out roastie
>>24847942
so how do you know if you're raping someone or not?
>>24847942
Try harder for bait.
can someone pls answer.
how often do girls try to resist going further when you're making out and things are getting steamy?
also have you ever gone further and what was the result?
>>24847990
Why would you be so opposed to that? If she's not ready, she's not ready. You can go jerk off in a corner somewhere.
>>24847990
>>24847994
>>24847997
I'm not a tumblrtard, nor am I trolling. Read my position and it's quite reasonable
>so how do you know if you're raping someone or not?
First, after you consent to sex, that consent obviously comes with barriers. If two people agree to sex, that doesn't give one of them the right to start cutting his/her flesh or to start shitting all over them, for example. So it would be rape if you clearly fall outside of a reasonable activity that the other didn't consent to
And second, even if the act falls short of those barriers, then consent can be revoked if you let the other person know explicitly. So the woman has to clearly communicate to the guy that she no longer consents -- this can be done by telling him to stop, or by trying to escape physically if she's physically unable to talk (ex. being choked).
Obviously if none of her conduct could be conceived as "terminating consent", then the guy did nothing wrong.
