This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
Feminists, would you think less of a man who dates a sex worker or glamour model?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Bornblue
Victorian period? You do realise the Victorian period was before the 1900s? Everything i mentioned is after that, most of it within the last 40-50 years.
A 'very small' gender pay gap isn't true nor good enough. There should be no gender pay gap.
A 'very small' gender pay gap isn't true nor good enough. There should be no gender pay gap.
The pay gap statistic is skewed by the fact that more women do things like nursing than investment banking or engineering for example.
Comparing the average pay gaps between the same job, the pay difference is insignificant. I remember there was an article saying it's around 0.4% and fluctuates all the time.
There will always be a tiny gap. It's just chance.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by KingBradly
(this is more geared towards sex-neg feminists)
Would you think he's only in it for the sex?
Should he "educate her" to take a more feminist path, or is he not allowed to do that as a man?
Would you think he's only in it for the sex?
Should he "educate her" to take a more feminist path, or is he not allowed to do that as a man?
Is he paying to date her or is it an actual relationship as opposed to a finically deal.
If it is the later then i would think nothing of it. Being a sex worker doesn't define you. Whilst the latter is slightly different, I'm aware a hell of a lot of sex workers are unwilling/coerced into it or feel pressured into it due to financial difficulties, that alone makes my attitudes to the current sex worker climate rather bleak but it is possible the sex workers is doing it without such outside influences.
Original post by sw651
You clearly are not educated enough on such issues to make proper judgment.
And the fact you think men cannot be raped is acceptable is disgusting, you really need to get real and stop with your egalitarian views.
And the fact you think men cannot be raped is acceptable is disgusting, you really need to get real and stop with your egalitarian views.
Seems like it's you who needs to be educated.
Men can be raped legally. That's the law. Both men and women can be raped under the law. The offense includes penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth by a penis. Both men and women can be raped.
You're just making stuff up.
These "sex-neg feminists" aren't feminists. They're misandrists/misogynists. Part of the concept of feminism is to allow both men and women to do what they want with their body and feel like they can, without hurting themselves or others of course. 
As for the initial point, I would never feel any less or any more of a man (or woman or other) who dated a sex worker or a glamour model. It's not my place to judge. Great for them
As for the initial point, I would never feel any less or any more of a man (or woman or other) who dated a sex worker or a glamour model. It's not my place to judge. Great for them
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by JaydAlex
These "sex-neg feminists" aren't feminists. They're misandrists. Part of the concept of feminism is to allow both men and women to do what they want with their body and feel like they can, without hurting themselves or others of course.
As for the initial point, I would never feel any less or any more of a man (or woman or other) who dated a sex worker or a glamour model. It's not my place to judge. Great for them
As for the initial point, I would never feel any less or any more of a man (or woman or other) who dated a sex worker or a glamour model. It's not my place to judge. Great for them
misandry and feminism aren't mutually exclusive.
Original post by BookBird
I'm a sex-positive feminist, but I want to answer. It would be hard to say whether or not he's only in it for sex, but if I determine that he is, I'd probably let the girl know that she can do better. Educating her to take on a more feminist path? Feminism is about empowering all kinds of women, even sex workers, no, especially sex workers, therefore I would tell him to tell her, "You go girl!"
Wth is a sex-positive feminist?
Original post by iamthetruth
Wth is a sex-positive feminist?
Someone who believes women should have the right to sexual freedom. So some basic examples are pro nude modelling and casual sex. Obviously there's much more to it regarding feminist movements but I don't know enough about the politics to share.
I personally feel the stereotype of sex postive and sex negative feminists doesn't do feminism any favours. It sort of implies that you have to be one extreme or the other. Just like Feminism often gets a bad rep because of the radical feminist acts.
Original post by Bornblue
Seems like it's you who needs to be educated.
Men can be raped legally. That's the law. Both men and women can be raped under the law. The offense includes penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth by a penis. Both men and women can be raped.
You're just making stuff up.
Men can be raped legally. That's the law. Both men and women can be raped under the law. The offense includes penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth by a penis. Both men and women can be raped.
You're just making stuff up.
Posted from TSR Mobile
God you don't know the law at all
Original post by sw651
Men can be raped. Only men can rape but under the law both men and women can be raped. Look it up. It's the law.
This is the Legal definition of rape under UK law:
'
1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents. '
Now where does that say a man can't be raped? Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be raped.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Bornblue
Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be raped.
Irregardless of whatever the current legal definition is, does that seem fair to you?
Original post by Dheorl
Irregardless of whatever the current legal definition is, does that seem fair to you?
Yes.
English law places 'penetration' as the most serious offense as a violation of bodily integrity.
That's why the two most serious crimes are 'rape' and 'sexual assault by penetration'. Women can commit sexual assault by penetration if they use a foreign object to penetrate a man. That carries the same sentencing guidelines as rape. There is of course an argument that they should all just be called rape, but they do carry the same sentencing guidelines so it's not a massive issue.
As to a woman forcing a man to penetrate her, that's still an offense for sure, but unlike rape, she is not penetrating the victim.
Again, the emphasis is on penetration, not the sex.
Original post by Bornblue
Men can be raped. Only men can rape but under the law both men and women can be raped. Look it up. It's the law.
This is the Legal definition of rape under UK law:
'
1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents. '
Now where does that say a man can't be raped? Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be raped.
This is the Legal definition of rape under UK law:
'
1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents. '
Now where does that say a man can't be raped? Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be raped.
I feel like every time someone opens a thread regarding gender differences, feminism etc. it somehow ends up in a massive debate over what the legal definition of rape is. I must have seen this argument at least three times before and I don't even come on TSR that much!
As far as I'm aware, last I checked, legally it isn't classed as rape when it happens to men, it's still only classed as sexual assault. Whether the rapist is female or male. This may have been updated since (I hope it has/will be updated soon.)
That doesn't mean it isn't classed as rape though - the law isn't always up to date and there often loopholes. If a man is penetrated in either the mouth or anus when he has clearly not given his consent then of course it's rape. Rape help charities etc. and most people would agree that that is rape; it's just not technically classed as rape in the eyes of the law yet. It's still sexual assault.
Original post by Bornblue
Yes.
English law places 'penetration' as the most serious offense as a violation of bodily integrity.
That's why the two most serious crimes are 'rape' and 'sexual assault by penetration'. Women can commit sexual assault by penetration if they use a foreign object to penetrate a man. That carries the same sentencing guidelines as rape. There is of course an argument that they should all just be called rape, but they do carry the same sentencing guidelines so it's not a massive issue.
As to a woman forcing a man to penetrate her, that's still an offense for sure, but unlike rape, she is not penetrating the victim.
Again, the emphasis is on penetration, not the sex.
English law places 'penetration' as the most serious offense as a violation of bodily integrity.
That's why the two most serious crimes are 'rape' and 'sexual assault by penetration'. Women can commit sexual assault by penetration if they use a foreign object to penetrate a man. That carries the same sentencing guidelines as rape. There is of course an argument that they should all just be called rape, but they do carry the same sentencing guidelines so it's not a massive issue.
As to a woman forcing a man to penetrate her, that's still an offense for sure, but unlike rape, she is not penetrating the victim.
Again, the emphasis is on penetration, not the sex.
Yes, I know that's what the emphasis in on, but I don't see how you can think that is fair. If a man drugs a woman at a club and has sex with her, he will forever be known as a rapist. A woman who drugged a man for sex would never have to wear that label. And that seems fair to you?
Irregardless of sentencing, societies reaction to the word rape IMO is strong enough that the crime of sex against a persons will, whether or not penetration is involved, should carry the same title. An apple is called an apple, no matter the colour.
Oh and yes women can rape men it's just more difficult. And again the law doesn't really acknowledge it as rape.
By use of sex toys, other objects. Viagra. Whilst a man is sleeping or sedated. Or even when a man is wanting to have sex so he has an erection but changes his mind for whatever reason and makes that clear to the women and she proceeds to have sex with him by force (the brain and the genitals don't always work simultaneously some people remain turned on physically even though their brains are saying no.) Or there other ways to keep an erection by force (usually used by men with erectile dysfunction) but I won't go into graphic detail.
By use of sex toys, other objects. Viagra. Whilst a man is sleeping or sedated. Or even when a man is wanting to have sex so he has an erection but changes his mind for whatever reason and makes that clear to the women and she proceeds to have sex with him by force (the brain and the genitals don't always work simultaneously some people remain turned on physically even though their brains are saying no.) Or there other ways to keep an erection by force (usually used by men with erectile dysfunction) but I won't go into graphic detail.
Original post by Dheorl
Yes, I know that's what the emphasis in on, but I don't see how you can think that is fair. If a man drugs a woman at a club and has sex with her, he will forever be known as a rapist. A woman who drugged a man for sex would never have to wear that label. And that seems fair to you?
Irregardless of sentencing, societies reaction to the word rape IMO is strong enough that the crime of sex against a persons will, whether or not penetration is involved, should carry the same title. An apple is called an apple, no matter the colour.
Irregardless of sentencing, societies reaction to the word rape IMO is strong enough that the crime of sex against a persons will, whether or not penetration is involved, should carry the same title. An apple is called an apple, no matter the colour.
Yes, because the acts are different. One involves penetrating the victim, the other doesn't.
Yes the woman would carry the label, she'd be a sex offender.
The focus is on penetration, the act of physically penetrating someone is deemed the most serious, that's why both men and women can be the victims of rape and the victims of sexual assault by penetration.
Original post by Mazzy95
I feel like every time someone opens a thread regarding gender differences, feminism etc. it somehow ends up in a massive debate over what the legal definition of rape is. I must have seen this argument at least three times before and I don't even come on TSR that much!
As far as I'm aware, last I checked, legally it isn't classed as rape when it happens to men, it's still only classed as sexual assault. Whether the rapist is female or male. This may have been updated since (I hope it has/will be updated soon.)
That doesn't mean it isn't classed as rape though - the law isn't always up to date and there often loopholes. If a man is penetrated in either the mouth or anus when he has clearly not given his consent then of course it's rape. Rape help charities etc. and most people would agree that that is rape; it's just not technically classed as rape in the eyes of the law yet. It's still sexual assault.
As far as I'm aware, last I checked, legally it isn't classed as rape when it happens to men, it's still only classed as sexual assault. Whether the rapist is female or male. This may have been updated since (I hope it has/will be updated soon.)
That doesn't mean it isn't classed as rape though - the law isn't always up to date and there often loopholes. If a man is penetrated in either the mouth or anus when he has clearly not given his consent then of course it's rape. Rape help charities etc. and most people would agree that that is rape; it's just not technically classed as rape in the eyes of the law yet. It's still sexual assault.
You're wrong there.
Sorry for the bluntness. But legally men can be and are raped and it is classed as rape.
Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be victims of rape.
That's not my opinion, that's English law.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Bornblue
Yes, because the acts are different. One involves penetrating the victim, the other doesn't.
Yes the woman would carry the label, she'd be a sex offender.
The focus is on penetration, the act of physically penetrating someone is deemed the most serious, that's why both men and women can be the victims of rape and the victims of sexual assault by penetration.
Yes the woman would carry the label, she'd be a sex offender.
The focus is on penetration, the act of physically penetrating someone is deemed the most serious, that's why both men and women can be the victims of rape and the victims of sexual assault by penetration.
So you believe someone forcing themselves into you is more severe than having your genitals forced into someone, despite the same risk of STDs etc?
And yes, she'd be a sex offender, but in modern culture that carries no where near the same weight as "rapist" does.
To me forcing sex is forcing sex, irregardless of who puts what in where, and under any circumstances that act should be classed as rape.
Original post by Bornblue
Men can be raped. Only men can rape but under the law both men and women can be raped. Look it up. It's the law.
This is the Legal definition of rape under UK law:
'
1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents. '
Now where does that say a man can't be raped? Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be raped.
This is the Legal definition of rape under UK law:
'
1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents. '
Now where does that say a man can't be raped? Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be raped.
Posted from TSR Mobile
PENETRATION. How the hell is a woman supposed to penetrate a man?! SMH
Original post by sw651
You said 'men cannot be raped'. You did not say 'men cannot be raped by women'.
Men cannot be raped by women but can be by men, therefore men can be raped.
You said men couldn't be raped.
Men can be the victims of sexual assault by penetration by women which has the same maximum sentence as rape does.
Original post by Bornblue
You're wrong there.
Sorry for the bluntness. But legally men can be and are raped and it is classed as rape.
Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be victims of rape.
That's not my opinion, that's English law.
Sorry for the bluntness. But legally men can be and are raped and it is classed as rape.
Only men can commit rape, but both men and women can be victims of rape.
That's not my opinion, that's English law.
I didn't know they had updated it. That is great to hear. Anyway irregardless of what the law states (cos obviously some countries are still way behind on updating laws) it is rape if someone forcibly has penetrative sex with you; whether orally, vaginally or anally; with a penis or a sex toy and whether it is the women or the man being the rapist.
Latest
Last reply 22 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 55 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Applicant Thread for 2024Trending
Last reply 13 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 16 hours ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 18 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 13 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 16 hours ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 18 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
