Active Users:607 Time:18/03/2026 09:52:32 PM
I accept there are exceptions under some circumstances - but they are exceptions, not the rule. snoopcester Send a noteboard - 23/08/2012 09:44:36 PM
If this kind of thing happens in an established long-term relationship, I think we can all agree that, while many people may still find it a dubious thing to do, calling it rape is absurd.


I'm not sure I do agree. It does still very much meet the definition of rape, after all.
Now if it has been agreed in advance that it is okay then it isn't or if it is as a result of a misunderstanding - for example one sleepy person thinking the other sleeping person is in a similar state of wakefulness and responding then I think in a relationship it can be seen a mistake.
we are talking about human beings, not blow up dolls.

Of course this was not a long-term relationship, or even a relationship at all, just a one night stand. But that one night stand having happened does create a certain grey area - it makes some things natural enough that would've been creepy or downright sexual harassment if he'd done them to someone he had no sexual relationship of any kind with. I think just about every sane person would agree that actually having sex with her while she was asleep goes far beyond the level of increased familiarity which their prior consensual sex made justifiable - but it's hard to draw clear lines in that.


I don't see it as a grey area at all - what he did was start having sex with someone who didn't even know what was happening, let alone have a chance to consent (and one of my major issues with Joel is his repeated stating that it hinges on refusal and not consent, which frankly I think any sane person would see as nonsense).
Cuddling up? fair enough. Sex acts on their sleeping body? Utterly wrong.
*MySmiley*

Robert Graves "There is no money in poetry, but then there is no poetry in money, either."

Henning Mankell "We must defend the open society, because if we start locking our doors, if we let fear decide, the person who committed the act of terror will win"
Reply to message
Rape - British left wing politician takes on American right wing politician in stupidest comment off - 22/08/2012 11:03:50 PM 1136 Views
Galloway - I'll always remember him for being a Cat to be honest. - 22/08/2012 11:14:58 PM 720 Views
Erm... what on earth is that? - 22/08/2012 11:19:13 PM 522 Views
Celebrity Big Brother in the UK - 22/08/2012 11:22:17 PM 575 Views
People who support abortion only for rape are the most retarded in the whole debate - 23/08/2012 01:05:17 AM 672 Views
Bullshit - 23/08/2012 05:01:24 AM 575 Views
That's an interesting variation with some legitimacy, though not compelling, to me anyway - 23/08/2012 07:25:50 AM 616 Views
That is a dangerous line of logic. - 23/08/2012 09:26:25 PM 892 Views
Okay, that really wasn't connected to my comments - 24/08/2012 02:39:21 AM 529 Views
Sure it was, but we can do it your way. - 24/08/2012 04:10:37 AM 602 Views
Yet you don't, you jump the gun here too - 24/08/2012 04:37:02 AM 614 Views
I was trying to cut to the chase; like I say, I followed your logic: I just disliked where it led. - 24/08/2012 06:10:40 AM 695 Views
Disliking the conclusion doesn't invalidate the logic, and stop veering out of the debate boundary - 24/08/2012 06:43:43 AM 641 Views
No, the logics invalidity does that, though you do not seem to like its conclusion either. - 24/08/2012 07:48:21 AM 820 Views
I'm not even sure what that means - 25/08/2012 12:38:56 AM 539 Views
The logic is invalid because invalid, however either of us feels about where it leads. - 25/08/2012 10:37:34 PM 601 Views
Okay, we're done here - 26/08/2012 05:36:28 AM 577 Views
Quotes are not my opinion. - 26/08/2012 06:37:19 AM 539 Views
You'd really benefit from post-secondary education. - 26/08/2012 12:14:02 PM 646 Views
Haven't you and Joel had about the same amount of post-secondary education, actually? - 27/08/2012 01:31:43 AM 666 Views
T^T - 27/08/2012 04:39:33 AM 589 Views
Is that the emoticon for perky titties? *NM* - 27/08/2012 11:07:06 PM 284 Views
He is an absolute berk. *NM* - 23/08/2012 01:08:58 AM 483 Views
To be honest, I think people MIGHT be overreacting to both comments. - 23/08/2012 01:33:54 AM 657 Views
Really? *NM* - 23/08/2012 06:33:46 AM 358 Views
Yeah. - 23/08/2012 06:40:05 AM 601 Views
I expect it is more of a "stating the obvious" response. - 23/08/2012 02:01:18 PM 598 Views
Heh, I didn't think so. - 23/08/2012 05:44:55 PM 637 Views
I said Akins comments needed MORE context. - 23/08/2012 08:50:09 PM 736 Views
Yes, I saw that. - 23/08/2012 10:28:50 PM 545 Views
Re: Yes, I saw that. - 23/08/2012 11:04:40 PM 577 Views
Re: Yes, I saw that. - 23/08/2012 11:08:46 PM 553 Views
Science sometimes produces shocking discoveries. - 23/08/2012 11:28:47 PM 579 Views
And sometimes one doctor with an agenda pulls "facts" out of the air - 23/08/2012 11:37:37 PM 634 Views
No argument there. - 23/08/2012 11:46:01 PM 608 Views
This - 23/08/2012 08:50:43 PM 626 Views
Okay. I misunderstood. Sorry. *NM* - 23/08/2012 09:58:20 PM 328 Views
Eh - 23/08/2012 10:37:15 PM 575 Views
Well, I didn't take it that way. - 23/08/2012 10:42:01 PM 696 Views
Good - 24/08/2012 02:20:27 AM 656 Views
Ah, I can understand if that is the case. - 23/08/2012 07:46:38 PM 602 Views
I read it the same way Jen did - 23/08/2012 08:49:16 PM 555 Views
Why? - 23/08/2012 08:51:59 PM 616 Views
See your reply here - the bit before the comma then the bit after it. - 23/08/2012 09:06:20 PM 613 Views
You can see where there's room for doubt in that though, surely. - 23/08/2012 09:20:19 PM 575 Views
I accept there are exceptions under some circumstances - but they are exceptions, not the rule. - 23/08/2012 09:44:36 PM 596 Views
Well, I have to clarify... - 23/08/2012 10:28:13 PM 574 Views
Re: Well, I have to clarify... - 23/08/2012 10:50:59 PM 544 Views
Re: Well, I have to clarify... - 23/08/2012 11:15:50 PM 544 Views
Re: Well, I have to clarify... - 23/08/2012 11:28:56 PM 635 Views
couple things - 24/08/2012 01:57:04 AM 539 Views
Re: couple things - 24/08/2012 02:26:23 PM 570 Views
Re: couple things - 24/08/2012 02:45:38 PM 521 Views
Re: couple things - 25/08/2012 12:11:03 AM 571 Views
You may be talking about Galloway and not Assange, but Galloway was talking about Assange. - 24/08/2012 06:28:00 PM 557 Views
Ew. - 24/08/2012 06:56:27 PM 585 Views
Yes, that about covers it. - 24/08/2012 07:42:13 PM 552 Views
Yes, I was talking about Galoway and what he said - 25/08/2012 12:15:15 AM 692 Views
Re: Well, I have to clarify... - 23/08/2012 11:34:51 PM 642 Views
I can - 23/08/2012 11:05:05 PM 508 Views
I gotta say I am with Paul - 24/08/2012 12:27:44 AM 608 Views
Hm. - 24/08/2012 02:08:33 AM 528 Views
OK - 23/08/2012 09:35:35 PM 563 Views
Bullshit. - 23/08/2012 10:00:54 PM 519 Views
Re: Bullshit. - 23/08/2012 10:52:02 PM 712 Views
To start again then Joel - 23/08/2012 11:14:07 PM 543 Views
My mistake then, sorry. - 23/08/2012 11:32:34 PM 576 Views
Agreeing without agreeing. - 23/08/2012 12:24:10 PM 657 Views
I have gotten used to you being right for the wrong reasons. - 23/08/2012 07:42:32 PM 561 Views
Yes - 23/08/2012 06:34:38 AM 704 Views
Indeed - 23/08/2012 08:47:40 PM 532 Views
I don't know about Galloway but Akin is being made to pay for his commnets - 23/08/2012 04:37:12 PM 629 Views
Um, I'm not sure about that last bit - 23/08/2012 10:43:15 PM 565 Views
this issue has been discussed none stop for two days and this almost never mentioned - 24/08/2012 12:28:25 PM 551 Views
well, that is where I'm confused. - 24/08/2012 07:03:16 PM 583 Views
Maybe I watch to much CNN - 24/08/2012 07:30:23 PM 522 Views
Yeah, I'm curious about that last point as well. - 24/08/2012 02:53:43 AM 595 Views
McCaskills campaign ran ads during the GOP primary calling Akin the "most conservative" candidate. - 24/08/2012 03:33:18 AM 758 Views
Interesting. - 24/08/2012 04:49:51 AM 540 Views
no it isn't kinda true - 24/08/2012 12:50:53 PM 517 Views

Reply to Message