An 8 year old male would not be capable of penetrative sex in most cases.

In an 8 year old male was molested by a 28 year old woman this would be assault, peadophilia, and a crime we would rightly want to see the woman locked up for a long time for. But it wouldnt be rape.

I dont know how much more simply I can make the statement. Whatever scenario, however badly the woman behaves and however innocent the male is, it isnt possible. Rape is defined as penetrative assault. A man can be raped by another man, but not by a woman.

_

In terms of the scenario with the sexy woman grabbing me... there are different levels of consent. I would be biologically consenting but not verbally consenting. As a society we require verbal consent to be in place or implied - and this is quite right.

But in that scenario, I could either tell the woman to get off or push her off.

I'd say women can't shoot, but then there's that Glock Sponsored Kick-ass competitive shooter.

I'd say women can't rape, but I've had studly friends complain of women 'forcing themselves' on them (hah, like men really need much prodding).

Shrugs. There'll be something I'm sure of eventually =P

:bowdown:May I bask in your glory sir?:bowdown:

OHHH!!!! That's where all the confusion is coming from. Had I known you didn't know what rape was from the start, we could have cut this conversation much shorter. Rape has got nothing to do with penetration, other than it's part of the definition of the act of sexual intercourse. Rape is when sexual intercourse takes place with at least one party being non-consenting. Either they were unable to consent (physically incapacitated or ineligible to consent such as the case of small children) or their withholding of consent was ignored.

PS: Anyone who can get an erection can have penetrative sex (I suppose this is in opposition to unpenetrative sex? whatever that is). Males are capable of erections from birth.

Because of the element of consent, rape can even take place within the context of marriage. According to Hines and Malley-Morrison (2005), 10-14% of wives have been raped by their husbands; the figures are inexact because it's so difficult to get a precise measurement of something as complicated as marital rape. The text also states that there is reason to believe this could go the other way, as violence is perpetrated by women against men (7% of men have been physically assaulted by an intimate partner), but that no studies have been done on it.

The Hines/Malley-Morrison text also includes a case study of a young man who had been raped since childhood by his grandmother; she had done the same to his father and uncles as they were growing up.

And what Idyllic had to say about women being the predominant physical abusers of children is also true, unfortunately (Sedlak and Broadhurst, 1996; among others).

I happen to have all of these statistics on hand because I'm actually studying for a final right now in a class called Child Abuse and Neglect; it also includes interpartner violence.

Epic fail, luv.
Females will kill anything threatening their child.
And then there is Lorena Bobbit and the chick that drowned her children, Susan Something.
Belle Gunness, Mary Ann Cotton, Rosemary West, Aileen Wuronos...
Women can be extremely violent.
Otherwise, there would be no need for the max security female prisons. One of which I visited and let me tell you, there are plenty of sane women that are there. Perfectly sane. And extremely dangerous when they have a reason to be.
Human beings have violence in their "psychology". Sorry, luv.
It's what keeps us alive.

Women can't.... oh crap. I'm TRYING to get back to the OP. But, I'm having so much fun busting up stereotypes.
Oooooh.
Women can't fly (unassisted).
Women can't turn people into stone.
Women can't turn invisible.

HA! Beat that.

Until you're short-drop hanged (the appearance of erections and ejaculation in the condemned is well-known) or have your prostate electro-stimulated, or your blood-pressure suddenly rises due to an increased heart-rate (like panic), etc...

Bullshit. I seriously doubt all those hanged men were sexually excited.

Boudicca. Carla Faye Tucker. Lizzie Borden. Joan of Arc. Shall I go on?

I wouldn't call Carla Faye Tucker "less brutal" than anybody short of Andre Chicatillo. The woman murdered two people with a pickaxe, bashed them both to a pulp, and reported experiencing orgasm with each blow.

Hmm. So how do you explain violent women? Oh, right, they're "Psychologically male" because of immersion in a cruel Capitalist society that is dominated by men. Odd, then, that so much child-abuse, murder, sexual assault, etc....commited by women exists in the historical record from before Capitalism came into being.

Please present evidence, then, that Contezza Bathory was a victim of anything. If it is, as you say, "widely held," some evidence shouldn't be hard to find. The primary-source records are very clear. The trial transcripts are very clear. Only one accredited historian, Lazslo Nagy, has disputed these findings, and his view of the incident is not borne out or supported by any other historian of whom I'm aware.

Hair-splitting. Both were in charge and could have stopped the bloodshed at any time. Neither one did.

You are aware, aren't you, that Argentina invaded the Falklands? You know, flag at the whaling station and all that?

It was a "major" enough conflict to require two carriers, several boatloads of troops, and the borrowing of advanced AIM-9 missiles from the United States. And even with all that, the only thing which saved the British forces was the fact that fewer than 50% of Argentine anti-ship weapons exploded and the Argentines had to keep large percentages of their land forces on the Chilean border.

1: Define "psychologically male" and provide sources.

2: You're in no position to diagnose anyone from the distance of history.

3: She "dressed as a man" because nobody made armor with built-in brassieres. For formal events, such as the crowning of King Charles at Rouen and her numerous appearances before French and English courts, St. Joan dressed as a woman. In fact, attempting to -force- her to wear men's clothing (by confiscating her own, feminine attire) was one of the final humiliations heaped upon her at trial.

The distinction you attempt to draw is immaterial, irrelevant, and intellectually dishonest. You never said anything about "warlords." You said:
Which is a definitive statement: "this fact is 100% true all of the time." My examples, Boadicca being the closest to your own home, show that your definitive statement is not true. Boudicaa "made" very effective war against the Romans for quite some time. Joan Of Arc made -very- effective war against the English; she -won- her war! Anne Bonney made "little wars" against Spanish, as did her friend and shipmate Mary Reed. Both women were known as "hellcats" and ferocious killers. Fa Mulan made such a little badass of herself that she got written into "Romance Of Three Kingdoms" as a Wei general "who frightened all men but Zhang Fei, so great was her prowess with the throwing sword," and the de-gored Disneyfied version of her story pissed off the Chinese so badly that a major-studio live-action biography of her is due for release this year. And I have personally known any number of female wrestlers, boxers, MMA fighters, fencers, Kung-Fu artists, shooters and hunters who would -love- to go 5rds with you after reading some of your crap about women and their capabilities. Got one little redheaded Sabreur in mind right now who'd cut you to pieces before you even saw her coming. Trust me: -that- little hellcat is a borne killer. Her technique actually isn't very good, but killer instinct? -THAT- she has in spades, and I've got the scars to prove it.

Women apparently can't get this thread back on track.


Can we take the rape stuff somewhere else?
I somehow don't think this is what GG had in mind, correct me if I'm wrong...

Hey noodle, you beat me to it, I was going to say the exact thing .

Now, back to the stereotypes.

Women can't drive.
Women can't have platonic friendships with men.

Bust away, folks.

My SO drives just as well as or better than most men I know. She prefers to drive manual transmission; can parallel park, usually on the first try or two (even downtown in tight quarters); and is generally confident, skilled, courteous, and safe. And as far as I know, she has a clean driving record.

I have never fallen in love with, nor have I slept with, any women with whom I've had a platonic friendship.

1)http://blogs.suntimes.com/sportsprose/patrick.jpg

2)I though the stereotype was that men cannot have platonic friendships with women, not the other way around.

oops, you are right, I goofed on that. That's what I was thinking but it came out backwards.

And yeah, I know women can drive. I was just offering up some stuff to bust.

This is the last rape post I'll make.

Strange, it's obvious from the majority of your posts that you have absolutely no idea what the hell your talking about in virtually all aspects of your debating.

You have been proven legally and biologically wrong in this thread. Regardless of how you feel about your own erection, or the law in general, you have been proven %100 wrong. Please just accept it and move on. It is also obvious that this is just another troll attempt.

Maybe he's just a bigot? Either way, it ain't good.

Women cannot take less than 3 hours in the bathroom.
Women cannot tell a story without sidetracking to the point of no return.

I think it'd be good if therape thing went somewhee else. I came here to be sexist, damnit!

Where's telekinetic? He (and some other folks) can vouch for the fact that I take about 2 minutes to get dressed. I was on cam in chat in a bikini, went upstairs to put on real clothes to go to the store, and came back downstairs in so short of a time that everyone in chat commented on it. I also take less time in the shower than my SO, and less time on the toilet.

Yeah, yeah, yeah... I always hear women say this like its a great mystery or something.

C'mon, girls... YOU try to get brownie batter out of a Wookie with some wadded tissue.

Women can't keep their head clean for shit.

I still have nightmares wherein I'm cleaning the female heads on the island...the horror, the horror.

I've got a wet one for ya.

See...this one I will totally agree with. I had to share communal bathrooms with other women for three or so years of university. It was GROSS.

Women can't play an MMORPG as a character of their own sex without attracting attention from horny male gamers.
Women can't experience sexual intercourse with 0% chance of pregnancy.
Women can't generally grow a beard or moustache.
Women can't suffer from diseases linked only to the Y chromosome.

Women can't hook up a stereo.

Tubal Ligation and/or hysterectomy.

Back in 1985, I was chosen to participate in a work sponsored tool & die maker
training program, at Deutsch Electronics.

Three interviews. Many questions that by law, they weren't allowed to ask,
but I answered them anyway. Questions like, "do you have any children?
& do you plan on having any children in the near future?"

I was fortunate to work with a master craftsmen who didn't mind
that I was a woman, but there were many others that were apoplectic
at the idea of me being there. (both the young & old guys.)

"women can't be machinists & tool & die makers!"
The harassment I endured was nasty at times.

What a difference 25 years makes. The attitudes are changing.

I played WoW for 4 years, and it was only if I CHOSE to reveal my gender that the comments started; and it totally depended on context. By and large the people in my various guilds were really happy to have a woman playing. Once, I played with a casual raiding guild on Destromath, and seriously LOVED getting on to Vent and hearing the reactions when I spoke up. One time, the conversation turned towards diarrhea, and the guys were like "Dude, maybe we shouldn't talk about this with Laurelin (my character) playing." And I replied, "Dudes, I have IBS. You wanna talk diarrhea? We can talk diarrhea." I probably only got the OMG! PICS! thing once.

Clearly you've never met the women in my family. Wax is our friend.

Wrong. I learned early how to hook up the stereo as sometimes I liked to move the stereo around, and everything had to be put back JUST RIGHT before Dad came home from work or else I would be soooo busted. And yeah, that's a multipiece stereo, with separate speakers, tuner, turntable, cassette player, and (later) CD player. I was the person in my family who hooked up the new CD player to the stereo.

Women are thriftier than men.;)
Example: I never wasted any meat when I hunted deer. I shot most all of them, in the head.
I was wearing Victoria Secret underwear beneath my blaze orange.
(I must be one of those cross-dressing psychologically male...critters.)[/QUOTE]

YOU are awesome! :thumbsup:

women cannot create weapons of mass destruction.

And for a site that is so populated with moderators, I dont know why people are allowed to constantly personally insult me for arguing my point of view.

Women cannot hit the report post button for Strange Famous. Wait, no one can do that for him. :)

Women cannot sexually arrouse my gay cousin, according to him.

Women cannot talk about the pleasure of taking a big crap.

Women can't see me naked in a locker room.

Strange, you know where the report post button is.

Thanks RogueGypsy.

It is impossible that even a devout homosexual could resist the sexual attraction of a very sexy woman.

Even if his mind and emotions were totally and 100% homosexual, his body is still wired with the same instinctive responses.

_

And I have never reported a post for what was aimed at me in it. I just think in the last few weeks Ive had people making fun of my weight, calling me a troll multiple times - and people shouldnt need to have to report something when it is in a thread that clearly moderators are posting in. If the moderator is in the conversation and does nothing than it seems to me clear that they approve or at least acquiesce to it.

But thats the last Im going to say on that topic.

Wait a second... Didn't you say...

So that means, even if a guy who finds woman as disgusting (to view sexually) as you find men (to view sexually), he will get hard? So... by your logic, no matter how gay a man is, he is still sexually attracted to a woman? Saying basically, he's not gay, he's just faking it? It's either that, or his erection is involuntary.

Wow.

I wonder if sticking SF in a room with Natural Manhood will cause the room to implode. Like sticking a dehumidifier and a humidifier in a room together.

I will again ask for proof.

It has been proven to you that erection is not dependant on sexual attraction. No one can control their erection.

Here is the definition of troll: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

Since you have a habbit of doing exactly that, I don't see where you were personally attacked. But if you feel that way, you can always use the Report Post option.

Where in God's name do you come up with this stuff? Homosexual persons, by definition, are "wired" to respond to their own sex. It's even visible on MRI/CT/PET scans.* It's a physical, morphological difference in the brain, the effects of which have been repeatedly confirmed, most recently by a study in Sweden, published in the Proceedings Of The Nat'l Academy Of Sciences.


*BBC NEWS | Health | Scans see 'gay brain differences'
What Makes People Gay? - The Boston Globe
Gay Men, Straight Women Have Similar Brains - washingtonpost.com


Naah, I was thinking something a little more hypergolic...Potassium Permanganate and Red Fuming Nitric Acid, maybe. You know, that stuff the Germans used for rocket fuel that'd sometimes blow up the rocket during fueling.


Edited to add: Given the above, that the brain of a homosexual male is morphologically similar to that of a heterosexual female, an interesting question arises for SF.

If gay men's brains are morphologically female(ish,) does this make them "psychologically female?" If so, how is it that gay men commit acts of violence? After all, psychological femininity supposedly prevents violence. How then to explain Jeff Dahmer, John Gacy, or the hundreds of thousands of reported incidences of domestic violence within gay partnerships? After all, SF: "Gay Male Brain = Female Brain. Female Brain = Incapable Of Violence." So how is it then that gay men are sometimes violent? Arsey-varsey, how is it that gay women are frequently -not- violent?

And I would -still- like you to respond to the fact, the simply known fact, evidenced every day in Nature, that the single worst enemy you can possibly have is a mother defending her young. Ludmilla Pavelichenko was defending her sisters, but 500+ dead Germans can't be wrong.

Who is "Naturalmanhood"? Youre the second person to mention that.

I have no problem to argue anything I believe in with any party. If this "naturalmanhood" guy is incorrect this will be shown through reasoned argument as it is in every case.

What I am saying in the previous post is that no one is 100% biologically homosexual, even if theyre romantic or emotional feelings are 100% homosexual. They may not give their verbal consent to any activity with the woman, and that is their right. But they will feel some degree physical attraction. This is instinctual.

if they CHOOSE to reject this they can do so easily by forcing themselves to think of something which is unattractive to them.

I am not saying that people who identify themselves as gay are "faking it". Just that no one is 100% gay in the physical sense. Just the same as no one is 100% lesbian.

You have been proven to be 100% incorrect biologically speaking. Erections are not dependant on sexual attraction.

Also, are you arguing that homosexuality is a choice?

The Appalachian State University Women's Rugby Team would like a few words with you. They've got a couple of Backs who look like they belong with the All Blacks and, I promise, if you try to suggest (or God forbid "prove") this nonsense to them, they will knock your balls right back up where they came from.

Of course sexuality is a choice.

We may have a natural disposition one way or the other, but we all choose how we act and who we do things with.

Fine then.

"Choose" to be gay for a day. If it's just a choice, I defy you to "choose" to be gay for a day. Go find yourself a nice hunka man, somebody you can really respect and enjoy time with, french his brains out, take him home and fuck him.

After all, it's just a choice, right?

In the thread where people were commenting on your weight, a mod note was posted for people to calm down and certain members were contacted in private as well. We don't generally advertise moderation. The thing is, most of the things you get picked on about are brought on by yourself, Strange. You make statements - repeatedly, and on many different subject - that have absolutely no generally understood basis in reality (let alone scientifically understood). We're here to protect people from unreasonable attacks, not having their own... unique... views challenged. I'd hope, after all these years, that you'd have taken to heart the fact that the entire population of this website almost universally disagrees with you on many of these topics. It's a good indicator that the problem just may not be with everyone else.

If you want to discuss this further, feel free to PM me.