Someone Finally Noticed

indiana homez >

"'Act 1' IS RAPE, and I don't know a person who would disagree; nor would condone such an act."

You haven’t heard from SDA LAS yet, he defends foreign and domestic pedophiles all the time on SDA.

I specifically said "person", not troll.

now, now, be nice, Lassie thinks it's a person

Quite right Indiana Homez. There were a number of times when I was in university where, under the modern "rape" definition, it would be hard to know who "raped" who as the women I met at a party was as drunk as I was.

Women have to take responsibility for their actions and the vast majority of men are interested in a woman who's awake and eager whereas one has to be a pervert to prefer passed out women. The only contact I have with women passed out at parties is to put them into a left-lateral position so they won't aspirate when they vomit.

"They must be protected..."

Thanks RD for the great segway... where I can promote one of my all time favorite tv rants:

"Personally, I hate sexual harassment laws. The original force behind them were disgruntled lesbians who felt they were not given the same opportunities. Along with ugly women, who are jealous of pretty women who got all the breaks in the work force. My cause to action is simple, women are victims. They need special help. Look, at the evolution of these sexual harassment laws. What we are really saying is women really should qualify under the Federal Disablity Act. They are less able. They cannot cope with romance in the office. They cannot contend with having to do a job and have a man smile at them. It is too much. Look where we use to be, first quid pro quo, then hostile enviorment, and now Sienfeld episodes. Women can't take it they bruise too easily. The laws are here to protect the weak and most vulernable in society. She is woman, protect her!"

- Richard Fish, "The Playing Field"

Minor pet peeve: Unless you can ride it to work, it's a "segue".

=)

To be fair, some types of conservatives want to conflate these two acts as well because ??? I'm not exactly sure why - A dislike of women, religion, rejection issues?

Teaching women to protect themselves from Act 1 and that Act 2 is not a crime does not mean Act 1 should not be a crime. Maybe it would help some people around here by imaging a different slightly different situation: change it to acts perpetrated on a drunk young man by another man who outweighs him by 50+ pounds and has intentionally got the victim drunk.

I have to disagree with your second comment though. I had a supervisor who harassed a number of female staff members and it is not about "romance" or not being able to handle a smile. It's about the creepiness of having someone talk only to your chest or having to make sure he's not following you up the stairs or worrying if he'll fail you on your probationary period if you tell him to FO. Harassment by an a-hole and fun flirtation/banter enjoyed by two coworkers are very different situations.

Make me a sandwich.

In contrast to The Creep supervisor we had a foreman who had a lock installed in one of the outer buildings where we worked. He told us girls to keep the door locked and to call the control room if The Creep showed up. He'd then send another worker out there until The Creep left. Of those two types of men, Max certainly doesn't remind me of the foreman.

If you keep that up I won't let you blow me.

Congratulations, max: The stupidity of your last two comments has surpassed that of every troll who's ever posted here.

What a disappointment. If you're even half a man you'll apologize.

"If 'Act 2' is considered rape, then I will suggest that most every dude I've ever known, or who has ever lived, is guilty of multiple episodes of rape."

There IS a reason Jimmy Buffett wrote a song called,"Why Don't We get Drunk and Screw".