Man Flees From Nymphomaniac

[Maze1125]

I find the idea of a man being raped by a woman quite... odd. How can a woman rape a man if it's her that's being penetrated anyways?

Who says it was?

 

[MomoElektra]

(And I'm feeling slightly miffed that the OP insinuates a feminist wouldn't think so because feminism).

Only slightly? It was pretty blatant.

If I'd said I was mighty pissed because THAT stupid (still not original) remark came up again someone could hold my anger against be (oh those feminazis, always so angry). So I try to not show it too much, sometimes.

I find the idea of a man being raped by a woman quite... odd. How can a woman rape a man if it's her that's being penetrated anyways?

By envelopment.

Rape is sex with someone or sexual deeds done to someone without their consent.
Relevant part: without their consent.

Some laws still mention only penetration, which is stupid.
Btw, you know who mainly argues for laws defining rape as sex without someone's consent, including women raping men by envelopment, instead of just forceful penetration (which mostly means rape done by men) or the likes? Who is arguing for those laws to treat all people equally when it comes to rape? Could it be feminists? Gosh, I think it is.

 

[Maze1125]

Who is arguing for those laws to treat all people equally when it comes to rape? Could it be feminists? Gosh, I think it is.

Yeah, that's right, the only people who ever argue for sexual equality are feminists.

It's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people who call themselves feminists who wouldn't even think to argue that men can be raped...
And it's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people in favour of equality in rape laws who would refuse to call themselves feminists...

It's a good job neither of those are true, because if either were, it might make your claim there sound rather selfish and arrogant.

 

[Mr Pantomime]

Why feminists? I don't see any of them saying that it shouldn't be considered rape for this guy or anything similar.

Yeah, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. That feminists don't believe a woman can rape a man? That's false.

Like any category of people, feminists are diverse and will have varying degrees of self-consistency. That is not meant as an insult, I could say the same thing about scientists and engineers.

All I said earlier, was that they should think carefully about this story, and the obvious reason is because its a test of their self-consistency. Whether or not a few self-proclaimed feminists post inconsistent opinions about this story, and its hypothetical gender-reversed dual, in this particular thread is irrelevant - its still a good test of how consistently a person believes in gender equality. All I said is that they should think carefully!

Im not too sure how this hasn't come up already, Nymphomania is a pretty serious condition. It isnt just "oh, im very horny, I want to fuck a lot of people". Often the sufferer can't actually control themselves, and will try to have sex with the first person they see. Its also linked to a lot of other more widely recognised mental conditions like Bipolar disorder, and ALzhiemers.

If this woman is actually a Nymphomaniac, its much better that she is sent into care than just being locked in a cell.

 

[MomoElektra]

Who is arguing for those laws to treat all people equally when it comes to rape? Could it be feminists? Gosh, I think it is.

Yeah, that's right, the only people who ever argue for sexual equality are feminists.

The "only" was made up by you. I didn't say that. Take a moment and wonder, will you? Why did you make this up?

It's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people who call themselves feminists who wouldn't even think to argue that men can be raped...

Prove there's even one.

And it's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people in favour of equality in rape laws who would refuse to call themselves feminists...

Never said there weren't. That's only in your mind.

It's a good job neither of those are true, because if either were, it might make your claim there sound rather selfish and arrogant.

Neither of what is true? You are not making much sense.

 

[Versuvius]

A nympho? A detachment of cops? If this were a porno the only response could have been

Spoiler

 

[Tipsy Giant]

Who is arguing for those laws to treat all people equally when it comes to rape? Could it be feminists? Gosh, I think it is.

Yeah, that's right, the only people who ever argue for sexual equality are feminists.

It's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people who call themselves feminists who wouldn't even think to argue that men can be raped...
And it's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people in favour of equality in rape laws who would refuse to call themselves feminists...

It's a good job neither of those are true, because if either were, it might make your claim there sound rather selfish and arrogant.

Of course it could just be that all labels we like to use to define ourselves are bullshit and really you are either for equality or a twat!

 

[Maze1125]

Who is arguing for those laws to treat all people equally when it comes to rape? Could it be feminists? Gosh, I think it is.

Yeah, that's right, the only people who ever argue for sexual equality are feminists.

The "only" was made up by you. I didn't say that. Take a moment and wonder, will you? Why did you make this up?

For effect.

It's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people who call themselves feminists who wouldn't even think to argue that men can be raped...

Prove there's even one.

And it's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people in favour of equality in rape laws who would refuse to call themselves feminists...

Never said there weren't. That's only in your mind.

It's a good job neither of those are true, because if either were, it might make your claim there sound rather selfish and arrogant.

Neither of what is true? You are not making much sense.

This is a very interesting way to respond.

You first take the two statements as positive, asking me to prove one, and saying the other was true, even though I stated them in a negative way. This suggests you understood fully what I was saying despite the sarcasm I was using.

You then respond to the last line as though you were totally confused about the whole affair, directly contradicting the way you responded to the previous two lines.

This suggests to me you're doing nothing but nitpicking because you don't have an actual response.

As for proving there are feminists like that, I've met them, both on-line and in real life.
You prove that they don't exist.

 

[Maze1125]

Who is arguing for those laws to treat all people equally when it comes to rape? Could it be feminists? Gosh, I think it is.

Yeah, that's right, the only people who ever argue for sexual equality are feminists.

It's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people who call themselves feminists who wouldn't even think to argue that men can be raped...
And it's certainly not the case that there are thousands of people in favour of equality in rape laws who would refuse to call themselves feminists...

It's a good job neither of those are true, because if either were, it might make your claim there sound rather selfish and arrogant.

Of course it could just be that all labels we like to use to define ourselves are bullshit and really you are either for equality or a twat!

Very true, which just makes it all the more absurd when people who call themselves feminists talk as though feminism was a significantly organised movement any more. I'm not seeing any of them throwing themselves under race-horses to get women convicted of rape.

 

[Evil Smurf]

I guess he was nailed down until the police came

 

[Evil Smurf]

DEATH BY SNOO SNOO!

 

[Elate]

T-snip-

-snip-[/quote]

Should I derail? To protect us all?

I get the feeling I should derail...[/quote]

Derail you say? But to where...

Think...

Maybe not where, but when... 0_o[/quote]

I like your thinking...

[b]To the Time Manipulating Thread Distorter 3000![/b][/quote]

Where we're going we don't need Time Manipulating Thread Distorter 3000s! To the delorian!

[img]http://film.minimodelshop.co.uk/8025701F0054F3AD/ls/SunStar-2710/$File/back-to-the-future-part-2-de-lorean-lk-diecast-model-car-sun-star-2710-p.jpg

You can ride shotgun, only I am allowed to drive it. We must go to the past to stop isometry from making his post!

You know what they say...

The power of love is a curious thing
Make a one man weep, make another man sing
Change a hawk to a little white dove
More than a feeling... that's the power of love.

I know it's a double standard to make jokes about this when a man was essentially raped, but hey, that's our society. Just one last thing... WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?!?!

Spoiler: MORE THAN A FEELING!

Seriously though, she sounds like she would be into some freaky stuff. Man lost out.

 

[barbzilla]

First off, why did this degrade into yet another feminist topic? It has absolutely nothing to do with feminism.

On Topic: Yes there is such a thing as too much sex for an individual. There comes a time when your libido starts to wear down and you would rather watch a movie with your woman/man then get down and dirty (don't get me wrong, down and dirty time is still an active concern). My limit is down to once a day, and from my understanding as a male it will continue to drop further (not good in my eyes as I enjoy sex) without hormone treatments.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

I feel sorry for the man's penis.

I do too. I do too. My God...

Anyway, I find

Spoiler: this

appropriate.

This is a good story for the feminists to think about, since if it was a woman trying to leave and a man who insisted she stay, and she told police she stayed because she saw no other alternative, the man would probably be facing charges of rape.

Why?
Why would you say that?
What possible good could come from saying that!?

 

[Iron Criterion]

Would I call the cops on her? Nah. I'd just go with it (providing she's good looking of course). If you're at the point of having one-night stands, why not get a fortnight's worth at once? Besides, it sounds as if she's has plenty of experience. Open to a lot of different shit too, I'd imagine.

Clearly you've never had sex before, because I tell you there is only so many times I can have sex in a single night before things start to become painful and I'm milked dry. Having it more than three times in a single session is god-awful.

 

[MomoElektra]

Who is arguing for those laws to treat all people equally when it comes to rape? Could it be feminists? Gosh, I think it is.

Yeah, that's right, the only people who ever argue for sexual equality are feminists.

The "only" was made up by you. I didn't say that. Take a moment and wonder, will you? Why did you make this up?

For effect.

So you admit you distorted what I said.
To make it seem I supported a view when I didn't.

This is a very interesting way to respond.

You first take the two statements as positive, asking me to prove one, and saying the other was true, even though I stated them in a negative way. This suggests you understood fully what I was saying despite the sarcasm I was using.

You then respond to the last line as though you were totally confused about the whole affair, directly contradicting the way you responded to the previous two lines.

This suggests to me you're doing nothing but nitpicking because you don't have an actual response.

Hey, English is not my first language, I misread. Can you do without implying bad motives?

As for proving there are feminists like that, I've met them, both on-line and in real life.
You prove that they don't exist.

How do I prove a negative? Am I required to be able to do that now?

What about burden of proof?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

 

[Maze1125]

Hey, English is not my first language, I misread. Can you do without implying bad motives?

If English is not your first language, why do you care if it's a group that calls themselves "feminists", which is an English word, that argues the most for equality or not?

How do I prove a negative? Am I required to be able to do that now?

What about burden of proof?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

Oh please, I say that a group of people exist, and my evidence is that I've met many of them.

You're response is basically "Well I've not met any of them, how do I know you're not lying?"

You might as well be saying "How do I know black people exist, yeah you say you've met loads of them, but I never have. Burden of proof! BURDEN OF PROOF!!!!!"

Edit: Anyway, if it comes down to burden of proof, then you made the positive claim that the majority of people who argue for equality in rape cases are feminists. Prove it.

 

[MomoElektra]

Hey, English is not my first language, I misread. Can you do without implying bad motives?

If English is not your first language, why do you care if it's a group that calls themselves "feminists", which is an English word, that argues the most for equality or not?

Feminist an English word? Yeah, right...

And I mentioned it because many a poster here likes to ignore or outright deny that feminists want an outcome that also profits men.

How do I prove a negative? Am I required to be able to do that now?

What about burden of proof?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

Oh please, I say that a group of people exist, and my evidence is that I've met many of them.

You're response is basically "Well I've not met any of them, how do I know you're not lying?"

I'm not sure you'd have to be lying. Considering what gets called a man hating feminazi here it's more likely you too use that term very loosely and not at all accurately.

You might as well be saying "How do I know black people exist, yeah you say you've met loads of them, but I never have. Burden of proof! BURDEN OF PROOF!!!!!"

Ouch. You just compared the existence of people of color to the existence of feminazis.

Edit: Anyway, if it comes down to burden of proof, then you made the positive claim that the majority of people who argue for equality in rape cases are feminists. Prove it.

Ehm, weren't you just admitting that you made that up? You know, for effect, and I never actually said that?

 

[Maze1125]

Hey, English is not my first language, I misread. Can you do without implying bad motives?

If English is not your first language, why do you care if it's a group that calls themselves "feminists", which is an English word, that argues the most for equality or not?

Feminist an English word? Yeah, right...

Yes.
Even if your language has a word that is spelt the same and pronounced the same, that doesn't mean that word has the same meaning.

We're talking about "feminist" as an English word here.

And I mentioned it because many a poster here likes to ignore or outright deny that feminists want an outcome that also profits men.

That's because many who call themselves feminists don't want outcomes that benefit men.
Some are people who only care about women, and don't care if men benefit or not, while other outright want men to suffer.

Do many on here exaggerate the problem? Yes.
Does the opposing side constantly understate the problem? Also yes.

I'm not sure you'd have to be lying. Considering what gets called a man hating feminazi here it's more likely you too use that term very loosely and not at all accurately.

The particular way you're accusing me of committing a falsehood doesn't change my point in the slightest.
Also, I haven't used the word feminazi once.

Ouch. You just compared the existence of people of color to the existence of feminazis.

Yes, I did.
Care to actually respond to the point now, rather than just Appealing to Ridicule?

Edit: Anyway, if it comes down to burden of proof, then you made the positive claim that the majority of people who argue for equality in rape cases are feminists. Prove it.

Ehm, weren't you just admitting that you made that up? You know, for effect, and I never actually said that?

No, I never said that at all. For someone who doesn't like their words twisted, you sure like twisting everyone else's.

You made a positive claim which you have not backed up, to quote:

Btw, you know who mainly argues for laws defining rape as sex without someone's consent, including women raping men by envelopment, instead of just forceful penetration (which mostly means rape done by men) or the likes? Who is arguing for those laws to treat all people equally when it comes to rape? Could it be feminists? Gosh, I think it is.

You have consistently failed to back the claim you made there, and when ever asked have changed the subject. Not only failing the Burden of Proof, but also committing several Red Herring fallacies.

 

[CruisingForBiddies]

This is a good story for the feminists to think about, since if it was a woman trying to leave and a man who insisted she stay, and she told police she stayed because she saw no other alternative, the man would probably be facing charges of rape.

Do you know what you just did. Truly this thread is damned.

"abandon hope all yee who enter here"

Should I derail? To protect us all?

I get the feeling I should derail...

Derail you say? But to where...

Think...

Maybe not where, but when... 0_o

I like your thinking...

To the Time Manipulating Thread Distorter 3000!

Where we're going we don't need Time Manipulating Thread Distorter 3000s! To the delorian!

You can ride shotgun, only I am allowed to drive it. We must go to the past to stop isometry from making his post!

Take me with you, we can bond over the experience and wear puffy vests to commemorate our righteous mission.

[sub]I could sit on your lap or something...[/sub]