GVC
Well-Known Member
Just responding in kind.Dude why the hostility ? Can't you just debate the matter without getting aggressive and condescending ?
edit: I went ahead and edited my post. Not that it matters now.
Last edited:
Just responding in kind.Dude why the hostility ? Can't you just debate the matter without getting aggressive and condescending ?
Google 'affirmative consent'. That discussion is far more prevalent today than it was 10-15 years ago. It's a discussion that needs to happen because there simply are grey areas. Sex can, for example, be violent, selfish and consensual. Affirmative consent doesn't only protect women from disrespectful men and outright rapists; it also protects well-meaning men in situations that seem ambiguous. You're unwilling to accept that consent isn't always black and white or to have an open, honest discussion about it. That's a mistake.
How many times are you going to change your standard for what constitutes rape? I've seen three sometimes contradictory standards in this thread alone.
I've never been in a situation where consent from my partner wasn't clear. That doesn't mean I can't conceive of such situations.
Haven't negged him once. He was a little hostile to jazzgal, but he's discussing the issue in an honest way and not degrading women in the process. And jazzgal can handle her business without help from me.You are walking a fine line. Get ready for Gameface and Jason to neg troll you and issue infractions. Anything that is not rape is rape. There can be no detailed discussion.
Haven't negged him once. He was a little hostile to jazzgal, but he's discussing the issue in an honest way and not degrading women in the process. And jazzgal can handle her business without help from me.
I've tried to respond to GVC as best I can. If I haven't addressed questions he's raised is because I don't have an answer.I love how you completely avoid the discussion when GVC has you nailed to the wall so you turn to character assassination of me. You ever been clubbing bro? There are some nasty drunk skanks out there. You negging me and mods infracting me and Jason cyber bullying me do nothing but prove how stupid your stance is.
I'm not sure what you want. I'm not going to spell out every possible sexual situation (even if I could) and define consent. Nor do I see how my definitions of consent have been inconsistent. I am willing to accept that consent is not always black and white, but grey areas mean one could be in a situation where what you believe is not what she believes. Is it worth the risk?Google 'affirmative consent'. That discussion is far more prevalent today than it was 10-15 years ago. It's a discussion that needs to happen because there simply are grey areas. Sex can, for example, be violent, selfish and consensual. Affirmative consent doesn't only protect women from disrespectful men and outright rapists; it also protects well-meaning men in situations that seem ambiguous. You're unwilling to accept that consent isn't always black and white or to have an open, honest discussion about it. That's a mistake.
How many times are you going to change your standard for what constitutes rape? I've seen three sometimes contradictory standards in this thread alone.