Attitudes to rape

[draqon]

You are unfair in your assumptions. Consider these statements, which are equally logical responses to the cases in question:

A woman must provide sex to man, if man asks 10 times for more sex than physically/emotionally is logical for satisfaction, divorce must be taken place.

A man must provide money to women, if he denies to provide money to woman more than 10 times, divorce must be taken place.​

Why did you choose assumptions in both cases that made the woman at fault? Why did you not consider the case of the man being at fault?


To be clear, I should point out this particular stream of discussion is based on a premise that I don't agree with - the premise that marriage is the exchange of financial support for sex. That premise is what I'll discuss in my next post, in the other stream of this discussion.

am I a man or a woman? MAN

If I was a woman...I would blame men...and thats what they do anyways .

 

[Oniw17]

To be clear, I should point out this particular stream of discussion is based on a premise that I don't agree with - the premise that marriage is the exchange of financial support for sex. That premise is what I'll discuss in my next post, in the other stream of this discussion.

You should start a seperate thread.

 

[Pete]

are you married? why did you marry?

Yes. It wasn't for sex - I was getting enough before I married.

We got married to establish legally, socially, and spiritually our commitment to each other. Establishing that commitment makes it possible to undertake long-term endeavours together (buying a house, raising children) without excessive risk.

 

[Pete]

am I a man or a woman? MAN

If I was a woman...I would blame men...and thats what they do anyways .

Are you not human?

It's not "us against them", draqon. That mentality is the basis of bigotry, whether it's sexist, nationalist, racist, or other.

 

[draqon]

To be clear, I should point out this particular stream of discussion is based on a premise that I don't agree with - the premise that marriage is the exchange of financial support for sex. That premise is what I'll discuss in my next post, in the other stream of this discussion.

Look I know its hard to accept the truth. But humans are biological machines...souls or not, doesnt matter. Anyway women need men to provide for family and men need women to provide for their physiology. There are more details...like women choose men who care for them/love them...but all that comes down to how good the male is to providing for the family. On man's side...it all comes down to how good the wife is in sex...if she is healthy...does she understand the man to provide psychological backup for stress and did she make a healthy baby worth for working at the job.

 

[draqon]

Are you not human?

It's not "us against them", draqon. That mentality is the basis of bigotry, whether it's sexist, nationalist, racist, or other.

noone's against anyone. I am not against them to the same extent as they are not against me.

 

[Pete]

If a husband says no to sex or asks for money on an unusual occassion more than 10 times, he would be to blame?

Is that a question?

Anyway, in the first situation, to me, it alright both ways. In the second situation, if they're married, neither shoud deny the other money if the situation is reasonable.

That's pretty much right. In all situations, both partners in a relationship (we've focussed on men and women in this discussion, but this is more general that that) should act in such a way as to respect the wellbeing of their partner, themselves, and any other stakeholders in their relationship (eg their dependants). If a conflict can't be resolved in a mutually satisfactory way, then the couple should seek outside help if they value their relationship.

 

[Oniw17]

Is that a question?

More of a suggestion to what he might be trying to say, but I think I was a little off.

Draqon
Isn't it a well-known fact that there's less sex after you get married?

 

[draqon]

Draqon
Isn't it a well-known fact that there's less sex after you get married?

It is a well known fact to me that there should be no sex before marriage. I abide to such rule.

0 sex < N of sex

 

[Pete]

noone's against anyone. I am not against them to the same extent as they are not against me.

It's not even "us and them". It's only "us" - we're all people. There is no "them".

There is no "them".
"Them" is the freedom-killer.
"Them" is the little-blindness that brings total bigotry.
I will face my fear of "them".
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
When it has passed I will turn my open eyes to see who "they" are.
Where "they" were, there will be no "them".
Only people will remain.​

(With apologies to Frank Herbert )

 

[Pete]

It is a well known fact to me that there should be no sex before marriage. I abide to such rule.

0 sex < N of sex

If it makes you equate marriage with a sexual contract, then it's a bad rule.
It's making you effectively equate a life-partner with a prostitute.

 

[Oniw17]

It is a well known fact to me that there should be no sex before marriage. I abide to such rule.

Who told you that? Your pastor?

 

[draqon]

If it makes you equate marriage with a sexual contract, then it's a bad rule.
It's making you effectively equate a life-partner with a prostitute.

thats were u are wrong...having sex before marriage is equating ur life by using services of prostitutes. Wife should be the only person to have sex with, as it is a bond that must be cherished forever until death. Inevitably a question on sex from other partners will come up...and deep inside the bond of love will never fully work.

 

[draqon]

Who told you that? Your pastor?

I am my own pastor.

 

[Pete]

thats were u are wrong...having sex before marriage is equating ur life by using services of prostitutes.

I've never engaged the service of a prositute. When I have sex, it's for mutual pleasure. If one of us isn't enjoying it, we stop. Do you think that women don't like sex? You seem to think that no woman would have sex unless she was being compensated in some way.

Wife should be the only person to have sex with, as it is a bond that must be cherished forever until death.

Cherished until death? But you'll get a divorce if you're not getting enough nookie?


How about this:
When you want sex, go and find a hooker, get married in a quick ceremony, bang her for a week, then get divorced. That way you get your satisfaction without breaking the "no sex outside marriage" rule.

You'd better make sure you sign an appropriate pre-nup, to make sure that you clear on how many times she's allowed to refuse sex, and how many times you're allowed to refuse money.

 

[Oniw17]

thats were u are wrong...having sex before marriage is equating ur life by using services of prostitutes. Wife should be the only person to have sex with, as it is a bond that must be cherished forever until death. Inevitably a question on sex from other partners will come up...and deep inside the bond of love will never fully work.

Marriage is just a legal and religious thing, people get married for onlly a few days sometimes. Alternatively, people stay together forever without ever getting married. I actually know two such people.

 

[draqon]

look people you might say here that it is ok to have sex with other partner besides the one you have married. My parents...of all the friends they ever knew...of all the people they ever knew...are the only ones to be together and are happy as always because neither had any other partners in their lifes.

People have a psychological mindset...if you had different partners before the marriage...during the marriage...you will remember the previous relationships and not cherish the marriage as much...thus come the divorces.

 

[James R]

Theoryofrelativity:

James, education on a forum is more likely achieved if you apply some intelligence to the process, this involves...leaving out the insults and the adhoms, sticking to facts and providing sources to support those facts and try to be concise. Insulting, offensive adhom posters cannot educate when on ignore.

If you dispute my "facts", I'm very willing to discuss those facts with you. Post where you think I am incorrect, and why.

Do you have a link regarding your claim that men can provide an erection 'on demand' for an agrressive female who is threatening his life and to harm him etc, and is thus sufferring anxiety and fear etc.

Copious amounts of information have already been provided in this thread. If you choose not to read that information, that's your problem. I have no intention of adding to what Bells has already said on this topic. If you choose to deprive yourself of that information by placing her on ignore, so be it.

To me, using the Ignore function just because you don't like somebody displays a lack of self-control. What are you afraid of? Nothing is forcing you to reply to them or waste time replying to things you disagree with. And closing your eyes won't make people with different views disappear.

I made the point a man in fear of his life is unlikely to be able to produce an erection on demand as fear and anxiety are root causes of erectlie dysfunction. BUT if you have evidence to the contrary lets have it please?

Read Bells' posts on that matter. Nothing further needs to be added at this point.


francois:

Was he really consenting though? Certainly not in the beginning. But when a person is forcefully coerced into a situation like that, can that person really be said to be thinking rationally, if say, genitals are making contact?

Do you maintain rationality during sex, or do you completely lose all self-control? If you can't think rationally during sex, you may have a problem.

You said it's not rape, but what about this scenario. What if the same exact situation happened to a woman. She didn't want to have sex, but then a bigger, beast of a man coerced her into having sex. She was screaming, "Please stop! Why are you doing this to me? Dear god!" and whatnot. But then in the middle of the act, she found herself becoming quite aroused. And then she started recriprocating and began having a good time.

Then exactly the same thing applies. She decided to consent to the sex. If she consented, there is no rape, and why on Earth would she complain of rape if she enjoyed the sex and was a willing participant?


J.B:

What is the source of your graph?


dragon:

Look I know its hard to accept the truth. But humans are biological machines...souls or not, doesnt matter. Anyway women need men to provide for family and men need women to provide for their physiology.

If you think that women are of no value to men other than for sex, you will lead an emotionally impoverished life and never have a meaningful relationship with any woman.

There are more details...like women choose men who care for them/love them...but all that comes down to how good the male is to providing for the family.

These days, many women work, and some men stay at home and look after the family. Kind of blows apart your theory of male-female relationships, doesn't it?

 

[draqon]

dragon:



If you think that women are of no value to men other than for sex, you will lead an emotionally impoverished life and never have a meaningful relationship with any woman.



These days, many women work, and some men stay at home and look after the family. Kind of blows apart your theory of male-female relationships, doesn't it?

look Im not an ultimate answer to the universe. Roles change. Laws change...People change.

And dont put words into my mouth...I never said woman's value is sex. I only said that men seek sex from women...it is their main attraction, yes they need love, affection, understanding, and also babies...reproduction which is the main purpose for a male.

Want to make human look more extravagant? why not...add souls...emotions...and such...doesnt make a difference.

 

[Pete]

look people you might say here that it is ok to have sex with other partner besides the one you have married. My parents...of all the friends they ever knew...of all the people they ever knew...are the only ones to be together and are happy as always because neither had any other partners in their lifes.

Yes, I'm sure that's part of the reason. I'm just as sure that their marriage is not a simple-minded "sex in exchange for support" contract.

People have a psychological mindset...if you had different partners before the marriage...during the marriage...you will remember the previous relationships and not cherish the marriage as much...thus come the divorces.

:bugeye:
You're the one recommending divorce if the sex isn't up to scratch, draqon.