Woman rapes man.

Scroll to see replies

FYI, while rare, there are ejectors seats in some helicopters. I think they eject rotors first then the seat, on one model anyway, so the occupants aren't hurt.

True, but in the event of a helicopter emergency it's rare that ejection would be contemplated. Most have autorotation capabilities that makes most emergencies pretty uneventful. So they're useful for a minority of emergency situation (which are obviously not commonplace) but aren't ever really installed because of the added weight of ejection seats and the system separating the rotor from the fuselage.

Reply 81

Huskaris

There's a difference between arousal and consent.

By that rationale if a girl gets at all wet during rape it doesn't count, and anyone that would suggest that would be just as stupid

Reply 82

Everglow

It's really quite unbelievable and sick that people are trying to say this wasn't rape because the guy had an erection. EVEN if he did get any remote pleasure out of the sexual assault, which I very much doubt he did, it doesn't change the fact that this woman did not have his consent which therefore makes it rape. That is the bottom line, no ifs and no buts.

Reply 83

scrotgrot

Original post by DylanJ96

Don't call someone an idiot for raising a valid point. Basically, you're wrong. In order for the women to rape the guy, he would have to be sexually aroused to get hard and if he's sexually aroused then surely it isn't rape? He'd have to be hard the whole time he was being raped which would suggests he's turned on by it. If he's aroused then it can't be deemed that someone is raping him in the sense that rape is forcing someone to have sex with you that doesn't want to have it against their will.

Rubbish. Women routinely get wet when they get raped, and if you're a man yourself you will know getting an erection often doesn't correlate with mental arousal. Inform yourself.

Reply 84

Chicken.M.

Original post by josh_v

Yeah, he will get it eventually.

I think the real problem is the legal definition of law. The wording of the Section A of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 seems to suggest that, in a legal sense, a woman cannot rape an adult male. I may be wrong about this, and welcome any corrections though.

ye the law is outdated.

Reply 85

TheGuyReturns

Original post by vincentjam

Original post by Doctor_Einstein

True. Just like it isn't rape if you get a woman to orgasm.

basically you're both idiots

I heard Tesco's is having a sale on sarcasm detectors, maybe you should go and pick one up? :biggrin:

Reply 86

Helloyellowmello

Original post by DylanJ96

Regardless, getting a hard on means that he's sexually aroused and especially getting one for a prolonged period of time throughout this the "rape". I don't consider someone who's sexually aroused to be getting raped as such - he could stop it at any time if he wasn't getting sexual satisfaction from it.

He couldn't stop the rape cos he was asleep
And he never consciously consented so it is rape

I do hope you're trolling for the sake of humanity

Reply 87

Helloyellowmello

Original post by DylanJ96

That's different. In order for the rape to occur the man must first have a hard on and, therefore, be aroused and I find this hard to define as rape. Women can still get raped even if they aren't aroused. You can't compare the two.

But they can't orgasm if they weren't 'aroused'. Again, I really hope you're trolling

Reply 88

tazarooni89

Original post by DylanJ96

Would the man not need to be sexually aroused for this to happen and, hence, it isn't rape? I don't know but it seems this way to me. :confused:

it isn't called "rape", because by definition, rape is the non-consensual penetration of someone else with one's own penis. Obviously a woman can't do that. But it's still an equivalent crime. Even if the man is sexually aroused, it still doesn't mean he's consenting to actually have sex.

Reply 89

Jam'

Original post by DylanJ96

Actually having a hard on doesn't mean necessarily that a man is aroused and more importantly willing to have sex with someone. Assuming you're a guy from your name surely you've woken up with an erection, had random erections that you can't explain, etc?

If someone forced themself onto you while you were sleeping with an erection surely that would be rape.

I really don't understand how you've come to the conclusion that an erection is conducive to consent.

Reply 90

Patrick@Worcs

In 1978 Joyce McKinney was sentenced to 12 months in prison for forcing a man to have sex with her, after she had forcibly restrained him. IIRC she had an infatuation with him, he had strong religious beliefs that such a liaison would be wrong.

QED

Patrick

Reply 91

converselove

Original post by DylanJ96

My point of view is nothing of the sort. It's clear that you want this "debate" to go on or you wouldn't keep quoting me, it's pathetic. You're still further proving my increasingly valid point.

Of course it is. Some rapists don't think that what they do is rape because their victim was aroused or orgasmed. (That is their defence in court). Why do you think there are so many jokes around that are along the lines of "it isn't rape if..."? Therefore your view IS the same as some rapists.

Reply 92

DylanJ96

Original post by SandmanMMA

You didn't answer my question......I take it you wouldn't mind if this happened to your mother or cousin during her sleep by some stranger. Until you answer I will quote the **** out of you :smile:

My mother has been raped, that was the close family member I was referring to. It let her with scars, mental health issues and sever, suicidal depression. I know how awful rape it more than others so stop asserting that I in any way condone rape. I, actually, find it one of the most repulsive crimes possible and I've had to secondary suffer as a child as a result of some piece of scum which decided to do this to my mother. If you contiune to quote me then you have no grounds to report me, in fact I'm just responding to your quotes. I'm not interested in debating with you. You're further proving my point.

Reply 93

converselove

Original post by DylanJ96

I've already explained that my mother was raped and, therefore, how I have most experience than most with this and how awful a crime I hold it to be. Frankly, accusing me of condoning rape is insulting and I have no interest in debating with you. Stop quoting me.

I have to say it, you're still proving my point.

Except you are condoning rape because you said that a man who has an erection cannot be raped however arousal has nothing to do with it. Sex without consent is rape. Whether the man gets aroused, as an orgasm or whatever. If someone doesn't consent, it is rape.

Reply 94

SophieSmall

Original post by DylanJ96

I'm not interested in debating with you. Stop quoting me. You're further proving my point.

Question, if the woman made the man take Viagra would you still hold the "view" it's not rape?

Reply 95

DylanJ96

Original post by SophieSmall

Question, if the woman made the man take Viagra would you still hold the "view" it's not rape?

It's a completely different situation and my view would be different. I've said this before, listen this time - I have no interest in debating this further with you. Stop quoting me.

Reply 96

SophieSmall

Original post by DylanJ96

It's a completely different situation and my view would be different. I've said this before, listen this time - I have no interest in debating this further with you. Stop quoting me.

Not really, Viagra is used when physical stimuli is not working due to a physical issue. If your penis does not become erect due to physical stimuli (whether you want the stimuli or not) there is a problem going on.

And if you didn't want a debate you're on the wrong sub-forum. Do what I want thanks.

Reply 97

matt375

Original post by SophieSmall

I don't even think he agrees with himself any more. Otherwise he would accept debate and answer the questions rather than hiding behind his mothers skirts.

Just thought I would join the 'debate' and say its not really a debate. Rape is about consent not whether someone has an erection while its happening. Its not about arousal either. Some women have rape fantasies, doesn't mean they would genuinely want to be raped at all.

Also whether the man has a boner or not is irrelevant. If you stimulate certain parts of the body they become hard, that's science it's not a logical decision of the mind. The same would happen with a girl's nipples too for example, which is often associated with sexual arousal but doesn't mean it wouldn't be rape.

Reply 98

Ronove

Oh god, what a car crash.

Da Di Doo

Rape is about consent. He didn't consent to sex so whether he was aroused or not is irrelevant.

Men CAN be raped too. But apparently the English Law doesn't acknowledge this.

No, in English law you need a penis to commit rape. That's not the same thing as men not being able to be raped. Just that a woman forcibly having sex with a man is a different crime, afaik with the potential for just as harsh sentencing. A woman could also be convicted as being an accomplice to rape (and thus being convicted of rape, afaik) if she took part in helping a person with a penis rape someone else. I thought you wanted to become a **** hot barrister?

Original post by Profesh

This is like the Fukushima of autism.