Search results

I thought people in Germany were always arsed.

I'm not sure if you're disagreeing with me about the inability to give consent past a certain point. From your post it seems so but from the Judges comments not so. Confused. As to my story, perhaps not hugely common but I could take you to an AA meeting tonight where pretty much everyone would...

Possibly you don't have experience of blackout drinking. I do, lots. One of my more extreme examples was I once blacked out totally for five days in New York. Some how I managed to function, not get hurt and even managed to change hotels but I cannot remember a single moment of it. Any decision...

Both lack charm.

I don't know who said it. I'm just pointing out that they are very different. One is a text I might have sent (in my youth, if we'd had texts) and the other is one I'd never have sent. Obvs. it is a reflection on the sender.

Yes. Miles. One objectifies her, one doesn't. Tells you about his mindset.

Firstly- first sentence doesn't make sense. Secondly - you don't have to be a radfem to sign one of the petitions. Many I know who signed aren't even fem let alone rad. Thirdly - it says nothing at all.

Then he's an idiot as well.

No it's not. The debate is not one of interpretation or nuance. One says consent was given, the other says she was raped. One is lying. Jury and several judges say it's Evans.

It's already been noted by others that you're weird. Here's another example.

I don't understand this post. Are you really suggesting that the difference between rape and consensual sex is a small one?

My point is that we should keep the focus on the victims and the effect rape has on them not on the type of perpetrator. the reason for that, as this thread makes abundantly clear, is that if you start making perpetrator comparisons you lose sight of actual offence.

I guess you'd have to ask the victims but in my experience it is the act of rape that is crucial thing not the circumstances. If you've been raped you don't think how lucky you were that it was a mild raping.

I'm afraid I don't know.

No, you miss the point. The crime here is rape. Horrific in its own, stand alone, right. There are no 'lesser' rapes. There are, of course rapes with other heinous crimes (assault, paedophilia,filming without consent, murder etc) attached. To suggest someone is somehow better (or at least less...

If a drunk woman is deemed (by law) unable to give consent then the state of the man (drunk or sober) is irrelevant. Drink responsibly kids.

The bloke, I would imagine, as being drunk is no defence against a criminal charge. You can't murder someone and claim it's okay because you were pissed.* * I am not a lawyer and therefore you have not been charged extortionately for this opinion.

If she has withdrawn her consent then from that point forward it's rape. Actually the point was aimed at the 'degrees' of rape apologists, "he didn't punch her, so it's not so bad" types, however no consent, withdrawn consent or incapable of consent = rape.

Rape is rape.