American Women need Sexual Freedom, Instead of Victimizing Themselves

[s0denone]

Foreword: This thread will deal with difficult and taboo subjects. Of this I am aware. I will ask, no, implore all of you partaking in the discussion to remain mature and treat the subject-matter with the respect it requires. It is not my intention to offend anyone, and if someone feel I have worded something poorly(in a way that is offensive), please inform me of such(In PM), so I can correct whatever mistake(s) there may be.
Be advised that this will be a long-winded post. I will raise a number of questions, be led on tangents and the like. The thread entirely to spur discussion, and I am eager to recieve the point of views of others.
Alright, enough with the introduction already - let us move unto the thread.

I'll start off by saying that I'm European, Danish in fact, and that my perspective is that of a heterosexual man. I think this is pretty much the whole reason I made the thread. I just don't get what all this debate is about. What is "rape", besides the man/woman who force themselves unto others against their will? What does "non-consensual sex" mean, when we are strictly using above definition of rape?

In a sense, my interest was piqued by the whole "Dickwolf" discussion, from Penny Arcade. In the past few days, I have read a lot of "rape survivor" blogs, and those with proclaimed feminists as their authors. I found a lot of what I read quite enlightening to say the least.

That being said, a lot of what I have read, I simply could not fathom. I am from Denmark, the first country in the world to legalise pornography. We have excellent equality of the sexes I daresay, of which I am very proud, although you should bear in mind that I am male saying this, and sexuality and sex is extremely liberated, to the point of it not being taboo at all. Women are flirting as much with the guys, as is the other way around. That, I think, is what all this is about. "Sexual Equality", I will dub it.

First topic: "Non-consensual although consent is given"
What I read in the feminist blogs was that when a woman is drunk, and the man is not(or not as much), and these two engage in sexual relations, it is rape. Or at the least "non-consensual". I am not talking about someone spicing another's drink with roofies, I am talking about two people in a bar, where one is more drunk than the other.

Why is this "non-consensual"? Surely, the woman was not forced to drink as much alcohol as she did, and how is the man to blame for what the woman did? He did not force himself upon her, and everything she did encouraged him. You can call it "morally dubious" to "take advantage" of a drunk person. It happens all the time in Denmark. Men and women alike, will wake up and think something along the lines of "Shit, what the fuck did I do last night!?". Then these people will move on. I must stress, as I feel (from having read so many American feminist blogs) men are portrayed as the only "offenders" in this, that it happens just as often to men.

In Denmark, however, people have sex a lot. I mean a lot. I hear kids are starting as young as 13 now-a-day(as in that being norm). I'm fine with that. Women and men alike have a lot of casual sex.
Why am I stressing this? Because I think the reason a lot of American women feel "raped", or have doubts if they had truly given their consent in a certain situation, is because "sex" in general, is stigmatised in the United States.

I'm not saying "All Women Are Prudes", instead I'm merely noting what I think to be a significant difference between Europe(especially Denmark) and the U.S.

It has actually become so ridiculous(to me) that women can now legitimately press "rape" charges on men who "take advantage of them" while they are intoxicated - regardless of whether or not they gave their consent... As they were intoxicated. The mind boggles.

Unto the next topic of discussion: "Coercion".
Women feel shameful for having slept with, or performed oral sex on, a boyfriend. They attribute it to something along the lines of coercion. I have read it countless of times, on the blogs I frequent. "I was coerced", "He coerced me into", etc. etc.

What does that mean?
Did he ask you? Oh, he did? You then said no, and he asked you again? Okay... So you basically said no, and then you did it anyway? Why is that who-ever the perpetrator was fault?

I realise that some have problems with their self-esteem (both men and women), and I am sorry to see others take advantage of that. Be wary that these people are taking advantage of your low self-esteem, to get your consent. They aren't raping you. They aren't taking advantage of you but of your low self-esteem. Does that make sense? I think it does.

"He coerced me", "I was out of my mind at the time, and he took advantage of it", etc. etc.
The world doesn't work like that. You can't back off and say "Wait a minute, I did something stupid! I don't want to be to blame for that! I was clearly coerced! I will press molestation and/or rape charges!".
Am I exaggerating? I don't know. I realise that the feminist/feminist reader point of view doesn't represent all women of the U.S. -- But you have laws in place, that genuinely makes this sort of thinking plausible(not to mention viable).

This sort of thing wouldn't work at all, in Denmark. I cannot, at all, imagine one pressing rape charges for sexual relations that "well, I wanted them at the time, but I didn't really want them anyway, you know? So it was kinda rape. I know I said "Yes", but I didn't mean it, you know? Yeah I know that all he heard was "Yes", but I still meant "No" when I said it".

Besides my own personal opinion of that being a huge bunch of BS, I think it devalues women. Why? Look at it. It says "Well, I can't make up my mind about stuff. I'm too weak to make qualified judgements and decisions myself. I need to back up, and then look at things in hindsight to realise my errors. Also, when people ask stuff of me that I don't want to do, I do them anyway".
Maybe I'm reading to much into that, but I think it's a sad point of view. Returning to my Danish roots, I think women and men should be equal in all aspects. I think women are wonderful creatures. I don't want to see them portray themselves as cattle that can be exploited. Is that really off the mark? Think on the term "coercion". That's exactly what I think it means. If women want equality (which of course they do, and should have) they need to stop thinking like this.

Lastly(Yeah, there is a another subject): "Molestation/inappropriate touching"
In the 7th grade, I played tag. You know tag, right? You usually touch the other person, and they are "It". Except this was male-only, and we hit each-other in the dick.

Maybe a bit of an odd introduction to this one, but there you have it. We also slapped the girls on their ass, and they slapped ours.
Hormones raging, you know? You can't help yourself.
Was it molestation? Well, if one of us decided in hindsight that they didn't really want to, and that it was peer pressure? Sure, it could be classified as such.

Now, to make the talk more serious on this matter, lets talk "groping". I feel that is what this is about.
Groping isn't all that great, I agree. So what is my point here?

I feel women are victimizing themselves. No, I'm not talking about the fact that they are being groped, but the fact that they act as helpless victims. Maybe the Danish mindset is really that different from the American one, but I think if a woman was ever inappropriately groped, she would scream, shout and holler - the whole thing, you know? She would get physical, too.
Hell, I've seen it happen.

On this subject, I also return to "Sexual Equality".
In Denmark "groping" isn't really that big of a deal. People shrug it off. Is that good? No. What does that have to do with "Sexual Equality"? Well, in Denmark, guys are groped as much as girls. Yeah, it's surprising, isn't it? Maybe I sound patronizing here, but I just appears to me, as if (in the U.S.) only men are offenders on "groping".

Now, the fact that both sexes are submit to this kind of behaviour often means that none of them feel terribly "victimized", and as such, none of them care all that much. Women don't think "Wow, all men are jerk gropers, I feel violated", nor does men think "Wow, all women are jerk gropers, I feel violated". Instead, both sexes think "Wow, that person was an asshole" and move on.

But... People usually aren't really that concerned with it in general. "Why?" you ask. Because both sexes, in Denmark, are very sexually aggressive. Both go looking for casual sex. Hell, hardly anyone goes out on the town looking to turn down an offer of sex, should it happen.

Now, I'm not at all defending "groping", I'm just discussing why it is a "problem". The act of it isn't any less morally reprehensible in Denmark than it is in the U.S., but it just isn't that big of a deal.

When both sexes are sexually aggressive, nobody really gropes anyone, you know? Look at Japan, with all their "Chikan"(Is that right?) movies and shit. Shy, nerdy-looking men feel up women on trains. It is all because of their repressed sexuality. Everything sexual is a big no-no... That's why they're doing it.

In Denmark, you don't really feel the need to feel up someone else. Why? Because your sexuality isn't repressed. You are encouraged(or at the least not discouraged) to sleeping with whoever you want, however often you want. When you can do that, why would you need to grope anyone?

So to summarize the thread in short:
I think women highlighting themselves as victims works against the goal of making them sexually liberated, which in turn works against them not being victims.

Note on "Sexually Aggressive":
I feel I need to clarify what I mean here. "Sexually Aggressive" doesn't require sleeping with a bunch of men or women. It doesn't imply morally dubious behaviour. What it does imply, however, is the option to be however lustful one wants to be, without any social stigma attached to that. It implies the option to be sexually aggressive - I.e. acting in whatever sexual way that one desires.

 

[Unspeakable]

What do you mean by liberated?

 

[s0denone]

What do you mean by liberated?

Oh, from the summarization? I thought that would be clear from the rest of my post...

I mean "sexually aggressive". As long as women are sexually repressed (in comparison to men) I feel there will exist problems such as those listed in my OP.

 

[SultanP]

Well, apart from generalizing about Danish men and women having oodles of casual sex (to the point where I almost feel that your are slandering me (being a Danish guy myself)) you have some excellent points. The first step towards not being victimized is to stop playing the victim.

 

[Wicky_42]

You forgot to actually say what the debate was about at the start

Interesting point of view. Might have to move to Denmark, heh...

 

[s0denone]

Well, apart from generalizing about Danish men and women having oodles of casual sex (to the point where I almost feel that your are slandering me (being a Danish guy myself)) you have some excellent points. The first step towards not being victimized is to stop playing the victim.

Well you can be sure we are(having oodles of casual sex), when compared to other countries.
I mean - even if you aren't having that much sex(or no casual sex) as man or woman in Denmark, you certainly have the option to do so - and no-one will think less of you, if you do.

Sure, there will be conservatives. These will, however, be the vast minority. Society as a whole will not look down upon you, as general consensus is that "sex" as a whole is completely "liberated" - in the way that you can do it however often you want, with however many people you want.

 

[xmbts]

With your first point I don't think it's about sexual repression, rather it's more like "I made a really dumb decision, who can I blame so that I don't look bad?"

For the second point it depends on what type of coercion, If it's a simple yes or no like you said then there's no problem really but it's not always that simple. It could potentially be alot of pressure like "Look if you don't want to do it I'm leaving you" and so on.

Onto the groping it's dependent on location duration and all that fun stuff, a quick ass grab at the store is nothing to lose your head about but if someone keeps it there, or other places for that matter, it gets really creepy to say the least.

Basically it's alot of loopholes and double-standards and it's all very dependent on circumstances.

 

[SturmDolch]

Nice article. Well written: it remained entertaining to read while also bringing up some good points.

I agree with you. In Canada, it's the same thing as the US. People are terrified of anything sexual.

And in the media, too. Oh my god! Janet Jackson showed half a boob on TV! Then I go visit my family in Switzerland and racier pictures are on billboards.

 

[Unspeakable]

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but your solution to women feeling victimized is if they became more sexually aggressive themselves? Doesn't that oversimplify and polarize the issue to the point where, to not be raped, you become a rapist?

 

[Gigano]

Well, it's common knowledge that when a subject is taboo and associated with shame, with openness and information on it thus de facto being restricted, problems are allowed to fester and grow. There is no doubt that being unable to openly discuss (female) sexuality have adverse effects for women and people's safe sex life in general.

Denmark for instance have a comparatively lower rate of teenage pregnancies than the US, despite being one of most sexually liberal places on earth (and having an age of consent of 15).

I'm not sure whether there's any correlation to having a sexually liberated culture and the particular problem of non-consensual, harmful, and illegal forms of sex though. One could certainly speculate that there was - when pornography was legalized in 1969, the number of sex crimes fell dramatically - but sex crimes have not been vanquished from Danish society, nor have the shame the victims feel been eradicated despite society being open and understanding. Many sexual offences never even reach Danish courts, so whether it's all that better here than other first world countries is hard to say.

As for the "many kids starting at age 13" bit, that's wrong (both in terms of law and often ethics, but also as a fact). The average age of sexual debut is 16 here, and have been so at least since the 1980's. There's just a lot more focus on those who do start young nowadays.

Also, it must be specified that women don't need to be sexually aggressive (it's not "Brave New World", after all), any more than men do. They need to have the option to be so if they individually choose that lifestyle for themselves, without being looked down upon for such harmless choice.

 

[Zeriah]

Interesting points! Though I would argue that in any serious business (or even public place with strangers) grouping just shouldn't really happen period (there's just no need for it, even if the victim's could handle it better) - though it might be different within groups of friends.

Denmark also sounds like a pretty cool place to live!

 

[GotMalkAvian]

I love that this whole thread was inspired by the Dickwolves from Penny Arcade. I've been keeping close tabs on that situation, too, and am pondering just how well the PA guys are handling it. I sent Gabe an email a while ago asking if people who already owned the infamous shirt would be allowed to wear it to PAX, since this either create the exact situation they were hoping to avoid or make the expo hostile to a certain group of fans, basically the exact situation but in reverse.

I think you made some good points, OP, but you need to be careful with the term "sexually aggressive." Being American, I can tell you that I often hear that term applied as a euphemism to particularly promiscuous or indiscriminate women (I don't think "slut" is considered politically-correct anymore...).

I think American women are trying to find the fine line between being sexually confident (being unafraid of sex, being unafraid to stand up for themselves, but also being responsible and careful) and being a slut (indiscriminate, irresponsible, self-victimizing).

If you were to go by American pop culture, you'd think that the sluts were winning by a landslide. Thankfully, most of the real women I've known fall under the "confident" category.

 

[AmayaOnnaOtaku]

I have some MAJOR issues with your post. First you are generalizing rape and molestation victims. Have you EVEN talked to one?

When I was raped I was not drinking, I was 16 a virgin and the the guy was stronger than me. I wasn't wearing anything slutty. Rape is about power, and control.

Coercion: Ever think the person may have been in an abusive relationship? Where if the woman doesn't person sexually she gets hurt physically or otherwise?

Molestation: Most molestation cases aren't that is an older person: friend of the family, family member, sibling, clergy, teacher, or parent.

Please look up the facts before you run off your mouth about something you have NO knowledge about

 

[Latinidiot]

An interesting point. I guess it all boils down to responsibility. Are you responsible enough to accept that it is you who drinks too much.

And I think you overdid a little on the 'we danish are sexually liberated'. In fact, The fact that children are starting so early with sexual interaction, and that the whole community is getting a bit too comfortable about sex, is, according to some, a worrying trend.

 

[Stasisesque]

I have some MAJOR issues with your post. First you are generalizing rape and molestation victims. Have you EVEN talked to one?

When I was raped I was not drinking, I was 16 a virgin and the the guy was stronger than me. I wasn't wearing anything slutty. Rape is about power, and control.

Coercion: Ever think the person may have been in an abusive relationship? Where if the woman doesn't person sexually she gets hurt physically or otherwise?

Molestation: Most molestation cases aren't that is an older person: friend of the family, family member, sibling, clergy, teacher, or parent.

Please look up the facts before you run off your mouth about something you have NO knowledge about

Calm down, it's quite clear he's referring to highly specific circumstances. The fact that you were not drinking and did not give your consent then take the consent back later when you regretted sleeping with someone completely removes you from the hypothetical scenario he's laid out.

Whether you agree with his interpretation of that highly specific scenario or not is beside the point. He isn't making any generalisations about rape.

Coercion, he's outright asking for clarification on that point. An abusive relationship would be an area he's missed, this doesn't mean he's generalising either.

Molestation, in fact, you're the one generalising here.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I'm not exactly sure how you thought this wouldn't be offensive, but I'll assume you're not simply trolling. All these points are commonly brought up by rape apologists and those claiming women would be liberated if they had the sole option of choosing whatever they happened to think those women should be like, and as such have been refuted by better people than me all across the net, but I'll share my thoughts.

It has actually become so ridiculous(to me) that women can now legitimately press "rape" charges on men who "take advantage of them" while they are intoxicated - regardless of whether or not they gave their consent... As they were intoxicated. The mind boggles.

A person who is intoxicated is not able to give consent, because intoxication impairs mental faculties. That should be really obvious. You're not allowed to drive while intoxicated, you'd get fired if you turned up to work drunk, you'd be in serious trouble if called as a witness in a court and turned up drunk. The same logic applies.

If a person cannot give consent, then having sex with them is sex without consent.

"Coercion".
Women feel shameful for having slept with, or performed oral sex on, a boyfriend. They attribute it to something along the lines of coercion. I have read it countless of times, on the blogs I frequent. "I was coerced", "He coerced me into", etc. etc.

What does that mean?
Did he ask you? Oh, he did? You then said no, and he asked you again? Okay... So you basically said no, and then you did it anyway? Why is that who-ever the perpetrator was fault?

Of course the perpetrator is at fault. You can argue whether or not it constitutes rape, but you are talking about a man getting a woman to do something she doesn't want to do, simply for his own pleasure. That doesn't seem morally dubious to you? You don't see why woman might feel unhappy if they give in to that?

If women want equality (which of course they do, and should have) they need to stop thinking like this.

So...you believe in women's equality, but you believe the reason they don't have it is cause of the silly ways women think? Unfortunately, you're not alone in that.

It has actually become so ridiculous(to me) I feel women are victimizing themselves. No, I'm not talking about the fact that they are being groped, but the fact that they act as helpless victims. Maybe the Danish mindset is really that different from the American one, but I think if a woman was ever inappropriately groped, she would scream, shout and holler - the whole thing, you know? She would get physical, too.
Hell, I've seen it happen.

On this subject, I also return to "Sexual Equality".
In Denmark "groping" isn't really that big of a deal. People shrug it off. Is that good? No. What does that have to do with "Sexual Equality"? Well, in Denmark, guys are groped as much as girls. Yeah, it's surprising, isn't it? Maybe I sound patronizing here, but I just appears to me, as if (in the U.S.) only men are offenders on "groping".

Now, the fact that both sexes are submit to this kind of behaviour often means that none of them feel terribly "victimized", and as such, none of them care all that much. Women don't think "Wow, all men are jerk gropers, I feel violated", nor does men think "Wow, all women are jerk gropers, I feel violated". Instead, both sexes think "Wow, that person was an asshole" and move on.

But... People usually aren't really that concerned with it in general. "Why?" you ask. Because both sexes, in Denmark, are very sexually aggressive. Both go looking for casual sex. Hell, hardly anyone goes out on the town looking to turn down an offer of sex, should it happen.

Now, I'm not at all defending "groping", I'm just discussing why it is a "problem". The act of it isn't any less morally reprehensible in Denmark than it is in the U.S., but it just isn't that big of a deal.

When both sexes are sexually aggressive, nobody really gropes anyone, you know? Look at Japan, with all their "Chikan"(Is that right?) movies and shit. Shy, nerdy-looking men feel up women on trains. It is all because of their repressed sexuality. Everything sexual is a big no-no... That's why they're doing it.

In Denmark, you don't really feel the need to feel up someone else. Why? Because your sexuality isn't repressed. You are encouraged(or at the least not discouraged) to sleeping with whoever you want, however often you want. When you can do that, why would you need to grope anyone?

So, it's women's fault they get sexually harassed and to combat this, they should become libersted by behaving the way men think they should? You don't see something odd there.

I think women highlighting themselves as victims works against the goal of making them sexually liberated, which in turn works against them not being victims.

So, it's the fault of women that they are victims of men? If women would just roll over and enjoy what is happening to them, the problem would go away? What a startling and original observation.

Here's a thought though, you don't think it might be better to condemn the perpetrator, and not the victim? You know, just for a change.

Ok, I get that you said you are a supporter of equality, and maybe you believe that you believe that. But you don't come off as that convincing when you follow the uusual path of victim-blaming or denying.

It's an alien concept I know (not being sarcastic, it really is), but not that complicated. If women are equal to men, then they are men's equals. That is, you don't ignore problems just because they tend to happen to women. You don't ignore women's experiences because they are women. You don't blame women for what men do to them. Women do not become liberated by getting them to be what men want. And most importantly, women do not need men to tell them how women's problems should be solved.

Yes, almost certainly you'll totally ignore everything I've said, because you know you know better. You know everything about equality of the sexes, because you're a man. But every time I come across someone who has written the same old stuff, I take the time and respond because maybe this time someone will take the effort (and I admit, it's a hell of an effort) to stop and think about what they know they know.

 

[s0denone]

With your first point I don't think it's about sexual repression, rather it's more like "I made a really dumb decision, who can I blame so that I don't look bad?"

No. Did you ever see a man press rape charges on a woman for the being "taken advantage off while intoxicated"?
If you have an example, please bring me a link. If you haven't, it proves that it is entirely out of social stigma: "women having casual sex is wrong".

For the second point it depends on what type of coercion, If it's a simple yes or no like you said then there's no problem really but it's not always that simple. It could potentially be alot of pressure like "Look if you don't want to do it I'm leaving you" and so on.

That has to do with self-esteem issues, as mentioned in the OP. He says he will leave you if you don't do X? Then leave him
A girlfriend once told me to stop hanging out with my friends as much, and spend more time with her. That would be fine, if I wasn't already fed up with her constantly demanding attention.

So I left her, you know? Broke up.

It has to do with self-esteem and reliance on the other part of your relationship. Your partner will make such demands of you ("Do X, or I will do Y") in an effort to advantage of you... Not of your body, but of your low self-esteem. It is manipulation, and not a very subtle form of it.

This, again, is about victimizing oneself. Get up, instead, and fight for your right. You can again call the act morally reprehensible, but surely it can't be illegal?

Onto the groping it's dependent on location duration and all that fun stuff, a quick ass grab at the store is nothing to lose your head about but if someone keeps it there, or other places for that matter, it gets really creepy to say the least.

I think you're misunderstanding the point entirely here. I'm not defending any kind of "groping" and find all of it equally disturbing. I am just offering a Danish point of view on why it may be such a problem in the U.S.(and I even add Japan at the end), and not Denmark.

It's about repressed sexuality. That's my take on it, anyway.

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but your solution to women feeling victimized is if they became more sexually aggressive themselves? Doesn't that oversimplify and polarize the issue to the point where, to not be raped, you become a rapist?

I think you're misunderstanding "sexually aggressive".
"Sexually aggressive" doesn't equal "Raping/Groping/Molesting/Whatever". It simply means looking upon the option of having sex without any social stigma. It means you can have sex with whoever you want, because you (and your sex as a whole) isn't sexually repressed.

Well, it's common knowledge that when a subject is taboo and associated with shame, with openness and information on it thus de facto being restricted, problems are allowed to fester and grow. There is no doubt that being unable to openly discuss (female) sexuality have adverse effects for women and people's safe sex life in general.

Denmark for instance have a comparatively lower rate of teenage pregnancies than the US, despite being one of most sexually liberal places on earth (and having an age of consent of 15).

I'm not sure whether there's any correlation to having a sexually liberated culture and the particular problem of non-consensual, harmful, and illegal forms of sex though. One could certainly speculate that there was - when pornography was legalized in 1969, the number of sex crimes fell dramatically - but sex crimes have not been vanquished from Danish society, nor have the shame the victims feel been eradicated despite society being open and understanding. Many sexual offences never even reach Danish courts, so whether it's all that better here than other first world countries is hard to say.

Sex crimes will never vanish. You should be mindful that this thread is only talking of "rape" in the sense it (may) be classified as, in the U.S. I am not talking of rape bearing the definition I mention in my opening remarks.

I am talking about women feeling like victims(feeling violated, raped, etc.) due to things that aren't in the slightest problems in Denmark.

My point is, then, that women can only stop feeling like victims, when they stop thinking of themselves as potential victims rather than equally sexually aggressive.

I think you made some good points, OP, but you need to be careful with the term "sexually aggressive." Being American, I can tell you that I often hear that term applied as a euphemism to particularly promiscuous or indiscriminate women (I don't think "slut" is considered politically-correct anymore...)

Yeah, I just realised that too. Will add a little note to the OP about the term.

I think American women are trying to find the fine line between being sexually confident (being unafraid of sex, being unafraid to stand up for themselves, but also being responsible and careful) and being a slut (indiscriminate, irresponsible, self-victimizing).

A work in progress, no doubt. I just feel that victimizing women does nothing if not slow the process. [/quote]

I have some MAJOR issues with your post. First you are generalizing rape and molestation victims. Have you EVEN talked to one?

I am saddened by your post. You have completely missed the point. I no way am I defending rape, molestation, coercion or groping. In no way. In fact the whole point of my post isn't the acts of sexual violence, but instead the mindset of the American woman as a whole.

To answer your question: Yes, I am good friends with a woman who was raped when she was younger, and have two female acquaintances who were molested as children.

When I was raped I was not drinking, I was 16 a virgin and the the guy was stronger than me. I wasn't wearing anything slutty. Rape is about power, and control.

I'm very sorry you were raped. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
This thread, however, isn't talking about "rape" as "forcefully engaging in sexual relation" but focuses on "One part is drunk and the other is less drunk, therefor it is rape", as such is the case in the American system.

Coercion: Ever think the person may have been in an abusive relationship? Where if the woman doesn't person sexually she gets hurt physically or otherwise?

I would classify that as rape, not coercion.
If someone draws a knife on someone else, and tell them if they do not perform whatever act, they will be killed, that is rape too.
Threatening? Rape.
Coercing? Taking advantage of low self-esteem.

Note: thaluikhain, I am writing a reply to you as you are reading this. This post was just long enough as-is.

 

[Woodsey]

The trouble is, you've been reading feminist blogs. The majority of those are insane, and most of them just want to show how much they hate men without saying that they really just hate men.

 

[Curtisthekiller]

First topic: "Non-consensual although consent is given"
What I read in the feminist blogs was that when a woman in drunk, and the man is not(or not as much), and these two engage in sexual relations, it is rape. Or at the least "non-consensual". I am not talking about someone spicing another's drink with roofies, I am talking about two people in a bar, where one is more drunk than the other.

Really? Damnit, guess that means no barfly's for me then, i don't drink.

OTne of the reasons for this is that its against the law to raise children... seriously look at the legal system- you can go to jail for touching someone.
i'll show you what i mean:
the typical school-age american girl knows a few things: how to read, how to open cans,how to swear, how to spend money and that if they fight someone they could get expelled and/or arrested and (presumeably) scolded.
seriously even if you take a martial art to learn something about defending yourself- stomping a groper or indeed even an attack by a fellow student will earn you nothing but scorn in this day and age because all it leads to is some satisfaction that borders on extacy and court dates.
it has in part to do that parents arn't raiseing their children but the fact that schools enable one-sided bullying unless you tell them about it- (which i assume is embarrising as it takes all control of the situation from you for the next 20 minutes at the least.) or it gets physical and to respond with such EXTREMES that are borederline retarded.
I remember a story that was related to me about my district suspending a couple of boy's for playing cowboys and indians.... truely the enviroments we grow up in are not the same my good man.
Authors note: above statement about general knowlage that every woman is expected to know within the province of north america and is the olny things i could think of that- situationaly and educationaly speaking most people should know. it is not ment to undermind the inteligence of girls.

Also: Puppies, i like puppies