A very lucky 14 year old...

[Canadian Crippler]

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1189658,00.html


A teacher accused of repeatedly seducing a 14-year-old pupil is too pretty to go to jail, her lawyers argue.

Debra Lafave, 24, faces up to 30 years in a Florida jail on charges including lascivious battery.


Her lawyer told a pre-trial hearing: "To place Debbie into a state women's penitentiary, to place an attractive young woman in that kind of hellhole, is like putting a piece of raw meat in with the lions."

Ms Lafave, a former pin-up model, will claim she was insane due to emotional stress and did not know right from wrong when she had sex numerous times with Matthew Merchant while she was a middle-school reading teacher.

The boy told investigators they had sex in a classroom, her house and once in a vehicle while his 15-year-old cousin drove.

He said Lafave told him her marriage was in trouble and that she was aroused by the fact that having sex with him was not allowed.

The judge agreed to appoint two mental health professionals to evaluate Lafave.

Her trial has been set for December 5.



I don't think this woman should be charged with ANYTHING. It's different from when a 14 year old female has sex with an older man. It's not like she played with his emotions, "confused" him, or made him do something he didn't want to. I'm sure the kid was more than happy to bang the snot outta this broad. I mean come on, what 14 year old wouldn't be?

[Gyno Rhino]

I disagree completely.

If we're going to sentence ANYONE to prison for sex with someone under a specific age, then it needs to be extended to both men AND women.

[Canadian Crippler]

I think this is one instance that shows there is no "equality" thus laws shouldn't be based solely on it.

I just don't see the problem with a male who's in puberty having sexual relations with an older woman. The boy can't get pregnant, and faces virtually no emotional issues from the event. Furthermore, it's clearly what he wants. Boys at 14 aren't raped by woman, or atleast that occurance is VERY VERY low. Chances are this older woman will be FAR more responsible than some smug 14 year old schoolgirl, likely making the boy use protection. I know a kid several months younger than me who slept with someone in there mid 20s when he was 15; all it really did was boost the hell out of his self esteem, made him happy, and he's as normal as can be.

It's different with females however, who are commonly raped and told to say they wanted to do it. Many females, even if they wanted to do it, can become pregnant and as well face strong emotional issues. All this can drag on negatively for the rest of there lives.

With these obvious differences, how can you say the laws should be the same?

Now do I think it's wrong for older people to be sleeping with younger people? Yes and no (the no is explained above). Should the teacher lose her job? Yes. I just don't think it should be considered a criminal act.

[pinky8713]

All i know is, it would have made me the happiest 14 year old alive, if my hot teacher had sex with me. Hell, it'd make me the happiest 17 year old alive if my hot 20 something year old teacher banged me in the classroom. :D

If that were to happen, i don't think she should go to prison for it. She wanted it, i wanted it..

It didn't do anybody any sort of harm, only did good. Why should she go to prison for it?


Now if only this would really happen...

[RussianRocket]

thats one attractive teacher. The kid has fulfilted every 14 year olds' dream. We all have a hot teacher in school that we wanted to shag, atleast i did. She should not go to prison.

[ddzc]

Question is, why the **** would he rat her out?? dumbass!

[Nuts]

A 14 year old does not have the mental maturity to have consensual sex with an adult. It would be very easy to confuse a kid of this age, especially if you're an attractive blonde whom just happens to be an authority figure. Sure, it's a wonderful dream for most kids as this is the stage in life where they are raging with hormones, but that doesn't negate the fact that they aren't mature. There is a reason why suffrage is set at 18 years of age.

Besides, how can you justify this action with a teenage boy and not a teenage girl? Are you implying that boys are more mature than girls at the age of 14? If it's not a maturity issue, what possible justification could exist?

Bottom line, Lafave broke the law. The law makes no exception for consensual sex with a minor, it's illegal, period. You let her slide, then there is a precedent for other cases, many which will involve older men with young girls. It's a slippery slope that we don't need to travel.

[MM]

I disagree completely.

If we're going to sentence ANYONE to prison for sex with someone under a specific age, then it needs to be extended to both men AND women.

Agreed. An adult woman seducing a young man is playing on different insecurities and weaknesses in the boy, obviously, and yet the same repercusions are evident regardless of the gender roles. Just because the boy may be presumed to "want it" more, doesn't mean that the adult woman is not doing some major psychological harm in the formative years.

[MM]

Question is, why the **** would he rat her out?? dumbass!

C'mon, like you would be able to resist saying to your friends "Dude! I just did it with Mrs. Lafave!".

[Jorge Sanchez]

First of all, where were all these teachers that are having sex with their students while I was going to school? At fourteen I would have loved to have sex with one of my hot teachers, especially that one. Hell, I still would. But you can't say that only males can be charged with statutory rape. The law has to be applied equally to everyone.

[jack_of_all]

CC, what if he had gotten HER pregnant? thats just as bad, it would be just as much his child as hers and would stress him out just as much. what if he wanted to have it and she aborted it to cover it up? i dont think he'd ever be normal after that.

[Gyno Rhino]

With these obvious differences, how can you say the laws should be the same?

Because a 14 year old girl can make the same decision that a 14 year old boy can.

If she wants it from a 30 year old, and gets it, we should then arrest the 30 year old man? But not vice-versa?

It's all stupid as hell.

[Gyno Rhino]

All i know is, it would have made me the happiest 14 year old alive, if my hot teacher had sex with me. Hell, it'd make me the happiest 17 year old alive if my hot 20 something year old teacher banged me in the classroom. :D

If that were to happen, i don't think she should go to prison for it. She wanted it, i wanted it..

It didn't do anybody any sort of harm, only did good. Why should she go to prison for it?



But what if the 14 year old who wanted it was a chick, and the 20 something a man?

[Bravo]

But what if the 14 year old who wanted it was a chick, and the 20 something a man?
He'd be crucified. Plain and simple.

[getfit]

Agreed. An adult woman seducing a young man is playing on different insecurities and weaknesses in the boy, obviously, and yet the same repercusions are evident regardless of the gender roles. Just because the boy may be presumed to "want it" more, doesn't mean that the adult woman is not doing some major psychological harm in the formative years.
i completely agree with this!

[Tryska]

I disagree completely.

If we're going to sentence ANYONE to prison for sex with someone under a specific age, then it needs to be extended to both men AND women.


i agree.


and bullsh*t she didn't know right for wrong.

she needs to go to jail. i don't care how "pretty" she is.

[Sensei]

Agreed. An adult woman seducing a young man is playing on different insecurities and weaknesses in the boy, obviously, and yet the same repercusions are evident regardless of the gender roles. Just because the boy may be presumed to "want it" more, doesn't mean that the adult woman is not doing some major psychological harm in the formative years.

EXACTLY. This woman is scum and a total disgrace to the profession. Does she have a problem getting dates?

I know if you're a young male, this sounds like a dream, but kids need more adults they can trust and depend on, not adults trying to use them...

[Gutz981]

I mean I got some hot teachers but Hes 14...Thats ****ed up. Pitiful on the teachers part, and depressing on the kids end too. Its just one hell of a ****ed up situation. Yes she should go to jail.

[sublime99]

I went to high school with her and briefly dated her for about 2 weeks. She was definetly a little weird personality wise but gererally a sweet girl. I would never have thought she would have done something like that. In high school she was a little heavier and a real homebody.

[GimpFace]

"she is too pretty to go to jail" That is the one of the best things I have ever heard!! Do you think it would work for me if I went and banged some underage tart!!

No! would it ****. And it bloody well shouldnt either (and not just because I am fugly)!!

Underage is just that. Under. Age.

They should throw her pretty arse in jail with the other Peados!!

[BilltheButcher]

I went to high school with her and briefly dated her for about 2 weeks. She was definetly a little weird personality wise but gererally a sweet girl. I would never have thought she would have done something like that. In high school she was a little heavier and a real homebody.

Awesome. Was she the class whore or show signs of instability?

Also got to go by the law on this one. Its a no brainer, not going to re-write law just because she is pretty. Its not like she lives in California or something.

[BG5150]

I don't get it? There's nothing wrong with this because he's a boy and wanted it--"he was going through puberty and every boy wants it" And if it were a girl that it's bad? Don't forget, girls go thru puberty, too.

I'm not condoning this whatsoever, but I'm just pointing out that if you think it's okay for the boy, than it would have to be okay for the girl.

[Y2A]

I say she is sentenced to my bed for a week... that'll learn her.

[BCC]

Yeah she should go to jail, but damn do I wish that would have happened to me as a kid.

[sublime99]

No she was pretty active academically but a homebody otherwise. I don't remember any issues with her being unstable mentally. We dated for a total of two weeks and then just kind of quit calling each other and i maybe saw her 3-4 times in the two weeks. I was a senior and she was junior, I do however regret never sleeping with her.

[Mission]

Lucky kid lol. :D

Sublime, what was she like as a kid? That's wild that you knew her! :eek:

[CarlP]

The real problem is, this woman could probably sleep with any man she wanted. Why would she pick a child. :bang:

[sublime99]

I wouldn't say i toatlly knew her i really didn't get the chance to know her. I met her when she was like 16-17, and really didn't get the chance to do anything but hang out a couple ties and makeout lol.

[-sin-]

She was married when all of this happened so this wasn't exactly a victimless crime. Having your wife cheat on you is bad enough.. but with a 14 year old kid? Damn, I feel bad for that guy.

I saw some pics of her a few months ago. She is a beautiful woman.

[Guido]

But....but....what about the song/video "Hot for Teacher"? So sad that so many young mens dreams have to be shattered by "the law".

[BG5150]

There are good looking male perverts, too, but nobody ever questions why they didn't go after women, people just call them perverts. That's what this woman is.

Don't you understand, it's not about sex. It's about control.

[Guido]

I mean, c'mon...

[-sin-]

Don't you understand, it's not about sex. It's about control.

I don't understand. Women already control sex.

[Built]

Our culture has sexualized power. That's why rape is a crime of violence, not passion.

[sublime99]

Not to stray from the subject but i just checked out your updated pics built you are a beautiful woman and i would have never guessed you are 42. SMOKIN!

[Canadian Crippler]

Because a 14 year old girl can make the same decision that a 14 year old boy can.

If she wants it from a 30 year old, and gets it, we should then arrest the 30 year old man? But not vice-versa?Yes, exactly. Everyone loves to play into the idea of equality; however equality does not exist! Males and females are not equal, they are different. Equal rights? Yes. But there are some laws which quite obviously should almost solely apply to one gender than the other. I just think this is one of them.

My point is that 99% of 14 year old boys would sleep with that broad, without any "seduction" as it claims. How many 14 year old girls sleep with a hot male teacher? Under 10%? It's totally distinguised.

These figures aren't pulled from statistics, but I hope you see my point.

[Hatred]

I feel bad for her Husband. But what did he do to drive her to do that?
I wish I had my 6th grade teacher...and 5th....yum...It's not like I wasn't having sex with her in my head everynight anyhow.

[Gyno Rhino]

Yes, exactly. Everyone loves to play into the idea of equality; however equality does not exist! Males and females are not equal, they are different. Equal rights? Yes. But there are some laws which quite obviously should almost solely apply to one gender than the other. I just think this is one of them.

My point is that 99% of 14 year old boys would sleep with that broad, without any "seduction" as it claims. How many 14 year old girls sleep with a hot male teacher? Under 10%? It's totally distinguised.

These figures aren't pulled from statistics, but I hope you see my point.

Dude, it ain't ME that wants equality.

It's the womenfolk. They push for equality - and if they ask for it, they should get it.

That means if a woman opens her mouth to me on the street, she's fair game to get punched in the face.

[RussianRocket]

That means if a woman opens her mouth to me on the street, she's fair game to get punched in the face.

i'm all for equal rights.

[Built]

Dude, it ain't ME that wants equality.

It's the womenfolk.

You don't want equality?

[Stackattack]

I feel bad for her Husband. But what did he do to drive her to do that?
I wish I had my 6th grade teacher...and 5th....yum...It's not like I wasn't having sex with her in my head everynight anyhow.
LMAO!

I pretty much agree with crappler.

[Canadian Crippler]

You don't want equality?Woman don't want equality. If they did, then the repercussions of me punching a chick would be the same as if I punched a dude.

[BG5150]

Woman don't want equality. If they did, then the repercussions of me punching a chick would be the same as if I punched a dude.
What was the joke?

What do you say to a woman with two black eyes?

Nothing you haven't told her twice...

I know that was totally wrong...but it was in keeping with the quote. (I don't make 'em up, I just pass 'em along.)

[Gyno Rhino]

You don't want equality?

No.

[Praetorian]

I'm against equality.

http://www.americanwomensuck.com/forums/index.php


:p

[Hatred]

What are you doing posting Tryska's site here? Did you clear it with Dan?

[jack_of_all]

Woman don't want equality. If they did, then the repercussions of me punching a chick would be the same as if I punched a dude.


yeh, ive heard of women who would actually YELL :swear: at a man who tried to hold the door for them because it was cheauvenist (sp...). if a bitch did that to me id punch her in the mouth for sure :bash: hows that for equal rights biatch! :fart:

[Hatred]

Rofl......my response would be "Ma'am...until you started yelling at me I had no clue you were a woman."

[Shao-LiN]

I, personally, don't find her that attractive.

[Built]

No.
Well THAT licks.

How come?

[Gyno Rhino]

Well THAT licks.

How come?

Because women don't know what equality means.

They want "equality" when it's a good thing, and sure as hell want to be the "little lady" when it comes to bad things.

[Ryder]

Because women don't know what equality means.

They want "equality" when it's a good thing, and sure as hell want to be the "little lady" when it comes to bad things.

That is the exact same thing I try to tell people.

[Built]

I'm finding it ... interesting, to be told I don't understand the concept.

[Alex.V]

Our culture has sexualized power. That's why rape is a crime of violence, not passion.


Actually, most of the recent psychology seems to indicate that this isn't true.

It's about sex, not as much about power or control. I gotta find some of the articles on this.

[mrelwooddowd]

Because women don't know what equality means.

They want "equality" when it's a good thing, and sure as hell want to be the "little lady" when it comes to bad things.

w0rd..

There's a lady in my building, and if you don't let her and any other ladies off the elevator first, she calls you out. Now, I gnerally will let a lady off the elevator first, but if there's 8 people (men and women mixed) and I'm the guy pressed up against the doors, I think it's asinine for me to go out of my way to let all the women off. Sometimes chivalry is out the door, and just letting people be comfortable comes first.

I had this exact situation one day with her, and she started running her mouth when I got off first. She said "ladies first, ladies first! i guess you're not a gentlemen, huh?" (she was FOLLOWING ME through the lobby)..I said "NO..I'm NOT a gentleman." She shut up after that..lol. The whole thing pissed me off enough, though, that next time I'm gonna tell her she's not a lady, and see how she takes it.

[Sensei]

Actually, most of the recent psychology seems to indicate that this isn't true.
It's about sex, not as much about power or control. I gotta find some of the articles on this.

WOW has this thread has gone from bad to worse!!

Look, rape IS about power and control - some sickos are turned on by power and control and inflicting pain. I'm starting to get the feeling from some of the posts here, that hitting a woman is ok with some of you - if she's getting uppity that is... Great group of "men"...

Built, I really don't know why you waste your time.

[J450n]

I, personally, don't find her that attractive.

Same here. Not the point of the post i know but has to be said.

[Gyno Rhino]

WOW has this thread has gone from bad to worse!!

Look, rape IS about power and control - some sickos are turned on by power and control and inflicting pain. I'm starting to get the feeling from some of the posts here, that hitting a woman is ok with some of you - if she's getting uppity that is... Great group of "men"...

Built, I really don't know why you waste your time.

Your ability to post with emotion and ignore logic and facts is truly astounding.

No one here said it was okay to hit women. We used this as an example of true "equality", which again, is something that 99.9% of women don't really want.

[Canadian Crippler]

I agree with Gyno. Pay the dinner bill for once, buy ME some clothes, and don't be surprised when you get punched in the neck for mouthing off. Then we'll talk about equality.

[Built]

Your ability to post with emotion and ignore logic and facts is truly astounding.

No one here said it was okay to hit women. We used this as an example of true "equality", which again, is something that 99.9% of women don't really want.

And neither do you.

[pinky8713]

Your ability to post with emotion and ignore logic and facts is truly astounding.

No one here said it was okay to hit women. We used this as an example of true "equality", which again, is something that 99.9% of women don't really want.

I agree 100% with gyno. Most women don't want equality like they claim.

[Gyno Rhino]

And neither do you.

I think the problem here is that you're hung up on the word "equality" - you're thinking of it as some kind of civil rights nonsense.

Realize that if men and women were "equal" there'd be no more paying for dates, no more male initiative, no more "ladies first", etc.

You don't want equality, do you? I sure don't, and I'd hate to be with a woman that did.

[Built]

I think the problem here is that you're hung up on the word "equality" - you're thinking of it as some kind of civil rights nonsense.

Realize that if men and women were "equal" there'd be no more paying for dates, no more male initiative, no more "ladies first", etc.

You don't want equality, do you? I sure don't, and I'd hate to be with a woman that did.

Your argument seems to vary - you initially sounded bitter about the arrangement. Now you sound like you like it...?

No matter. It's REALLY good to know I'm not your type. :windup:

[RussianRocket]

w0rd..

There's a lady in my building, and if you don't let her and any other ladies off the elevator first, she calls you out. Now, I gnerally will let a lady off the elevator first, but if there's 8 people (men and women mixed) and I'm the guy pressed up against the doors, I think it's asinine for me to go out of my way to let all the women off. Sometimes chivalry is out the door, and just letting people be comfortable comes first.

I had this exact situation one day with her, and she started running her mouth when I got off first. She said "ladies first, ladies first! i guess you're not a gentlemen, huh?" (she was FOLLOWING ME through the lobby)..I said "NO..I'm NOT a gentleman." She shut up after that..lol. The whole thing pissed me off enough, though, that next time I'm gonna tell her she's not a lady, and see how she takes it.


lol, i usually let the ladies out the elivator first as well. There is absolutely no logical reason for this besides looking like a nice guy. If a girl starting to talk to me about getting off the elivator, i'm not sure what i do. Probably just ingnore her stupid ass.

[Canadian Crippler]

And neither do you.I think you're missing the point. He isn't whining and fighting for it. I believe his point is that many woman who fight for "equality" really only want it when it benefits them.

[Built]

I think you're missing the point. He isn't whining and fighting for it. I believe his point is that many woman who fight for "equality" really only want it when it benefits them.

Have you had to fight for your equality lately, Mitch?

[body]

WOW has this thread has gone from bad to worse!!

Look, rape IS about power and control - some sickos are turned on by power and control and inflicting pain. I'm starting to get the feeling from some of the posts here, that hitting a woman is ok with some of you - if she's getting uppity that is... Great group of "men"...

Built, I really don't know why you waste your time.

Belial never said it was ok, he just said the reason is not to do with power, but to do with wanting sex.
I have read the some stuff on this subject, but nothing to make me a expert or anythings. Just staying it may be wise to give this merit.
The rapist is still wrong, and should have the same punishment regardless of reasons. But if you want to prevent rape happening. Understanding why people rape is important so things can be done to prevent it.

[Canadian Crippler]

Have you had to fight for your equality lately, Mitch?No, I've never fought for equality (mine or anyone elses) because I don't believe everyone is equal.

Now I don't believe men should punch women, because woman are weaker and more emotional. Same reason I don't think women should fight in the army. But if you are gonna fight for woman to fight in the army, then be sure to fight for women being able to be punched in the face by men.

[body]

No, I've never fought for equality (mine or anyone elses) because I don't believe everyone is equal.

Now I don't believe men should punch women, because woman are weaker and more emotional. Same reason I don't think women should fight in the army. But if you are gonna fight for woman to fight in the army, then be sure to fight for women being able to be punched in the face by men.

but its not okay for women to hit men in the face though!

[Canadian Crippler]

It's not ok either. But because woman are weaker, more emotional, etc. it's far worst for a man to do it than a woman.

[jack_of_all]

No, I've never fought for equality (mine or anyone elses) because I don't believe everyone is equal.

Now I don't believe men should punch women, because woman are weaker and more emotional. Same reason I don't think women should fight in the army. But if you are gonna fight for woman to fight in the army, then be sure to fight for women being able to be punched in the face by men.

its funny how it would be an outrage if all women were kicked out of the army, but if they had a draft that included women, that would probably be an outrage too.

[Canadian Crippler]

Sorry, I did not mean woman shouldn't serve in the army. I meant I don't think woman should be fighting on the actual battlefield.

[Shao-LiN]

Women know what equality is. As far as political correctness and the real world (money, power, jobs, etc.), women want to be held on equal grounds with men (although some would be inclined to say that they are better than men =P). Personal life issues, though, are a completely separate issue. To me, equality of the sexes is a political term. It doesn't really apply to one's personal life as far as dating and the like is concerned.

[Built]

It's not ok either. But because woman are weaker, more emotional, etc. it's far worst for a man to do it than a woman.

More emotional?

Ever been stalked, bud?

There's some pretty freaky male emotion.

[body]

It's not ok either. But because woman are weaker, more emotional, etc. it's far worst for a man to do it than a woman.

so this is more down to strenght?
if a specific women was tougher than a man. would this be still far worse for her to hit him?

[Canadian Crippler]

body:
I'm not using specific examples. GENERALLY, it is worst for a man to attack a woman.

built:
I punch a guy in the face. We get into a fight, tell our buddies how "gay" that guy is, and that's that. Maybe I get suspended for a couple days.

I punch a woman in the face. She cries, and cries, and cries. All her friends call me an abuser. I get arrested for assault. I get expelled from school. I'm on the news as the posterboy for the evils of male abusers.

Equality my ass.

[Gyno Rhino]

Your argument seems to vary - you initially sounded bitter about the arrangement. Now you sound like you like it...?

No matter. It's REALLY good to know I'm not your type. :windup:

I've never been bitter about it.

It's best to read what I type, and not try to read into a "tone".

My point was that many women say they want "equality" without a good understanding of what that is.

[MixmasterNash]

I'm against equality.

http://www.americanwomensuck.com/forums/index.php


:p

LOL. For a second, I thought that was a really scary site. Then I realized it's really just a gay dating service for some very repressed men.

[Alex.V]

Belial never said it was ok, he just said the reason is not to do with power, but to do with wanting sex.
I have read the some stuff on this subject, but nothing to make me a expert or anythings. Just staying it may be wise to give this merit.
The rapist is still wrong, and should have the same punishment regardless of reasons. But if you want to prevent rape happening. Understanding why people rape is important so things can be done to prevent it.

Thank you, body. When I read his reply, I was a little surprised at how he completely missed the point and replied with a absolute lack of comprehension and logic.

I was going to simply call him a douchesack and remove myself from the thread, but you were far more constructive. I appreciate it.

[Shao-LiN]

But you still found a way to call him one =P.

[mrelwooddowd]

Although men are physically stronger in areas such as lifting, running, etc., I don't think we're "physically superior" to women. After all, it's the females that are the ones carrying and birthing our children. They are the ones physically built for this task. I think that's plenty "strong" in my book, and no less physically demanding that hauling bricks, or fighting a war.

The bottom line, for me, is that we're both meant for different things, and in terms of physicality, shouldn't try to compare the sexes. I really don't think it's fair to put it into an "equality" discussion either. Equality for women should be about giving them an opportunity to do what they want, if they are physically or mentally capable...just like us men. It's not about expecting them to become men, or to be treated like men, when they are obviously not men. If they fail (which we see them do often enough..just like us men), then they gave it a shot and that's all they asked. If they succeed, then, more power to them..but the days of "men are superior" are over, and those women that that want an opportunity to show their stuff and make our world a better place, deserve it.

[Built]

I've never been bitter about it.

It's best to read what I type, and not try to read into a "tone".

My point was that many women say they want "equality" without a good understanding of what that is.
Okay, well, let’s backtrack a bit to see where I’m getting this “tone” from:


Dude, it ain't ME that wants equality.

It's the womenfolk. They push for equality - and if they ask for it, they should get it.

That means if a woman opens her mouth to me on the street, she's fair game to get punched in the face.

I asked


You don't want equality?

You replied

No.

Me:

Well THAT licks.

How come?

Because women don't know what equality means.

They want "equality" when it's a good thing, and sure as hell want to be the "little lady" when it comes to bad things.

We don't?

As a side note, I'm not sure who on God’s green earth goes out of their way to be given BAD things, but I digress…



…No one here said it was okay to hit women. We used this as an example of true "equality", which again, is something that 99.9% of women don't really want.

Nope. You only said it was okay to hit a woman if she opened her mouth to you.


And neither do you.



I think the problem here is that you're hung up on the word "equality" - you're thinking of it as some kind of civil rights nonsense.

Realize that if men and women were "equal" there'd be no more paying for dates, no more male initiative, no more "ladies first", etc.

You don't want equality, do you? I sure don't, and I'd hate to be with a woman that did.

You then suggested that it’s neither something that I want (?) nor something that you in particular find desirable or attractive in a partner.

Oh, and that civil rights are nonsense.


Your argument seems to vary - you initially sounded bitter about the arrangement. Now you sound like you like it...?

No matter. It's REALLY good to know I'm not your type. :windup:


I've never been bitter about it.

It's best to read what I type, and not try to read into a "tone".

My point was that many women say they want "equality" without a good understanding of what that is.



You sounded like you were a little unclear on what it was you meant. On the one hand, I had better be prepared to be punched in the mouth for wanting “equality”, whatever that is. Then 99.9% of us don’t actually want equality anyway, which is fine because you don’t either (?).

I'm not sure what YOUR definition of it is, but I'd love to hear it.

I've been fighting for MY definition of equality my whole life.

I wanted a man's pay. So I went back to school as an adult, and worked my way thought a man's education.

And I've ALWAYS paid my way.

In my grandmother's lifetime, women weren't even allowed to vote because we weren't considered to be persons under the law. Until the seventies, a woman whose husband raped her could not charge him with rape because marriage was considered to be consent.

These are recent memories in our history, so you'll forgive me if I find it a little frightening to read a thread where so many young men seem to be very much opposed to some amorphously defined notion of equality.

It made me feel very "back of the bus". I wonder how this thread would have read if you were to substitute the word "Blacks" for "women".

Now, maybe I got this all wrong - maybe this is just a male rant about how inequitable things still are, and if this is truly the case, I'd have to agree with you. The world is NOT an equitable place. We're not all equally abled, equally gifted, equally strong, capable, or talented.

What I’m hearing a lot of in this thread is “I’m bigger than you, so you have no equality” and “If you think you’re so equal, better be prepared to be punched in the face”.

Oh, and women are emotional. Makes it a little tricky to defend my position – if I try, I’m emotional. If I don’t … well, I’m not sure I’m all that better off then if I do. But at least I know I’m TRYING to be fair and logical.

I’d like the same, please.

At the risk of being thought of as, well, an equal.

[Sensei]

Nice post Built! Too bad they won't get it...

[Alex.V]

But you still found a way to call him one =P.

Of course. I couldn't not speak the truth. I am honor bound to do so.

:)

[Praetorian]

Women don't want equality. They only want 'equality' whenever it benefits them.

[Built]

Women don't want equality. They only want 'equality' whenever it benefits them.

Praetorian, kindly explain when you became "the voice of women everywhere".

[mrelwooddowd]

I really don't get this "women want equality when it benefits them" stuff. I can't see how having doors opened for them, or hoping that they don't get their eye blacked by a 100lbs heavier man is "unequal," when all the "true" feminists want is for someone to give them a fair shot, fair wage, and fair treatment.

Now, crazy feminists be damned, but there are extremeists in every facet of life. Sure, they're annoying as hell, but they don't speak for the women who just want a fair shake, and mostly in the workplace.

It has nothing to do with physical equality..

[Jorge Sanchez]

Women are emotional? So are men. You may think that women are more emotional than men, but I think there is little biological difference between men and women in their capacity to be emotional. If women are perceived as more emotional than men in our society it is a result of stereotypes and socialization which is a result of, not an argument for inequality.

[sublime99]

Ok woman screams rape man gets arrested no questions until dna studies are conducted. Man gets raped everyone points and laughs and woman stays free pending dna test's.

I don't believe in equality between men and woman when it comes to anything. I don't care who you are it's a double standard kind of like the black and white thing. Blacks beat up a white kid and it's just a fight, whites beat up on a black kid it's a hate crime.

[razorcut]

Women are emotional? So are men. You may think that women are more emotional than men, but I think there is little biological difference between men and women in their capacity to be emotional.Yes and no. Both definitely have the ability to be volatile. But this propensity for emotion comes from different branches of the hormone tree. Testosterone = aggression = males. Estrogen/Progesterone = Labile mood swings = females. This is generally speaking of course, in a primitive sense.

I digress, the teacher should receive the identical sentence that a male would in the same situation.

[Wierz]

Addressing the second topic of this thread (heh) if I feel I am getting the short end of the stick in equality, I'll fight it but that's my battle and is the responsibility of no one but myself to fight it. If other people want to help, great. If opening doors for my girlfriend, not hitting her if I'm hit (she's never hit me, just for the point of argument), and paying for dates means things aren't equal than I'm ok with that. You're all right, there is not true equality, only respect. I do all of that out of respect, and that is all. The only equality I see working (in my life) is mutual respect. From that, things tend to balance themselves out.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's on a person to person basis I think. All I can say is, at 14, I'd have hit it however often she wanted, and I'd have loved it. It would have been completely consentual and I'd have kept my mouth shut.

To each his own I guess. Was it a total lack of responsiblity on her part? Absolutely. Did she force him to do anything? I seriously doubt it, but they're the only two that know the truth.

There are 14 year old kids who belong in 5th grade, and there are 14 year old kids who read and perform at a college level. Every case is different, every case has a different level of maturity and therefore difference in ability to make informed decisions.


BTW, she's hot.

[Guido]

It's on a person to person basis I think. All I can say is, at 14, I'd have hit it however often she wanted, and I'd have loved it. It would have been completely consentual and I'd have kept my mouth shut.

To each his own I guess. Was it a total lack of responsiblity on her part? Absolutely. Did she force him to do anything? I seriously doubt it, but they're the only two that know the truth.

There are 14 year old kids who belong in 5th grade, and there are 14 year old kids who read and perform at a college level. Every case is different, every case has a different level of maturity and therefore difference in ability to make informed decisions.


BTW, she's hot.Well, it's good that we're finally back on topic!

Oh, and I agree with Built/elwood. Good explanations. :french:

[Canadian Crippler]

No matter how much ranting and how many paragraphs ANYONE writes, the fact is women still only want equality when it benefits them. As soon as it doesn't, they want to be treated "special" and "differently". I don't understand how many of you fail to see that.

I'm all for woman being able to do what they want, so long as they pass the same qualifications that men do. For instance, if they can get through the same army training that the men partake it, then all the power to them. However handouts, political agendas, and ridiculous preset ratio's to promote equality are 100% nonsense and anything BUT "equality". (Jessica Lynch for example; wtf was that broad doing in the army? And why would they go to save her specifically when there are MANY other POW's whom aren't being saved? Because she's a woman? Yes, and that's inequality.)

[Built]

No matter how much ranting and how many paragraphs ANYONE writes, the fact is women still only want equality when it benefits them.

As a general statement, what’s so odd about this? Couldn’t the same be said for men?


As soon as it doesn't, they want to be treated "special" and "differently". I don't understand how many of you fail to see that.

I'm all for woman being able to do what they want, so long as they pass the same qualifications that men do.
I don’t think anyone here would argue for anything else.

For instance, if they can get through the same army training that the men partake it, then all the power to them. However handouts, political agendas, and ridiculous preset ratio's to promote equality are 100% nonsense and anything BUT "equality". (Jessica Lynch for example; wtf was that broad doing in the army? And why would they go to save her specifically when there are MANY other POW's whom aren't being saved? Because she's a woman? Yes, and that's inequality.)

I’ve never been a fan of Affirmative Action strategies. But the fact remains that women are always going to be limited in their career aspirations because, on average, we’re smaller, and we’re the ones who bear young for the human race. According to the 2001 Census, the average annual income for women was about 58% what it was for men. Kinda hard to get in on the rat race when you’re gestating and breast feeding. And again, I speak in generalities – I have no children of my own, this has not affected me personally in my career objectives.

But you’d have to be some sort of an idiot to think there are no barriers out there facing women. The old boys club is still going strong in our culture. I’ve been FIRED for refusing the sexual advances of my boss (and good LUCK proving it. I didn’t bother to try). Not sure if this has ever, or is ever likely to happen, to you (and no, he was NOT hot – he was a fat, middle aged creep).

I do NOT know what the solution is. Maybe you have some brilliant plan, Crip? Other than telling me what I don't want without asking me?

[Jorge Sanchez]

Jessica Lynch was a mechanic. And whether or not she was actually 'rescued' is debatable.

[Wierz]

...

I do NOT know what the solution is. Maybe you have some brilliant plan, Crip? Other than telling me what I don't want without asking me?

I dunno what you want... but I want some update pics.. it looks like you've made SiCk progress since those were taken.


CC - I really think your attitude will change as you meet more people and experience more. Grouping large numbers of people (such as "all women") never really works because there are always people who break the mold, or don't conform. Unfortunately, stupidity knows no race or sex, and more unfortunately, you've had the priviledge of meeting enough of those idiots to make you think that is how all people act (I hope that made sense). I suck because I do a piss poor job of translating my thoughts into words.

[Miker]

Lets look at some facts.

1. Rape is about one thing.. power or domination. It is NOT about the sex, love, passion or lust. If you cannot get past this very basic point.. you might as well quit reading.. the rest of this note will pass by you like JumboJet heading across the pond.

2. The idea of equality can have many different meanings. In a strict sense, equality can require the same treatment of different people; however, another view of equality would require different treatment for different people in order to produce an equal result.

3. Men have dicks, and Women don't.. yet.. believe it CC.. they are both humans and as such.. are equal when it comes to everything outside the physical.. although I know plenty of women rugby players that would feed you your teeth for using terms like 'broad' in reference to them making them more than your equal physically as well.


You.. CC, Rhyno etc. say that women don't really want equality... at least not the bad stuff. Yet.. they like having doors opened for them, and polite gestures made their way etc. Curiously, I enjoy it when a woman accepts these acts of kindness and politeness. I don't immediately think they are trying to get the good stuff without the bad.

All of your arguments reference particular situations.. rather than taking a look at the big picture. Have you thought why women would want to discuss equality.. and please.. reference #2 above when thinking about this? Maybe because in all of history... it has only been in the last 20-80 years that women have seen any sort of movement made to treat them equally as humans, citizens, residents, professionals, persons etc. I know you are extremely young CC and haven't seen or experienced much firsthand when it comes to this subject. Women, at one point were treated as property and in some southern states and BC towns, they still are. They are used as glorified slaves and baby factories....meant only to provide sexual relief and domestic labour to the man of the house. They couldn't vote, drive, speak without permission etc. Now.. they want to be treated with equality. They want to be treated like they occupy as important a space on this planet as you do. Earning the same pay for doing the same job, having control over their own persons and making their own decisions without some man forcing them to follow his vision of their usefulness. Much of this has been dropped by the side now especially in Canada. Although there are still plenty of jobs where women earn less then men even though they do the same job.

I laughed out loud when you offered your opinion on women on the battlefield. For starters, you haven't a goddamned clue what kind of will and strength of character it takes to even make the committment to join the armed services let alone end up in a combat ready outfit. Women are just too sensitive in your eyes eh? But even if all your posturing about women in combat does originate out of an actual heartfelt concern about women's welfare, your opinions prove you haven't quite comprehended that war just isn't the way it used to be. Once upon a time two opposing sides would carve out a battlefield, dig a couple of trenches, lob some grenades, fire rifles at each other and take breaks in between. But as September 11th made it painfully clear to Americans, war no longer occupies a circumspect battlefield. Fighting occurs in cities and combat comes in small attacks, land mines and car bombs. Anything vaguely associated with the military becomes considered a target, even civilians. It's impossible to ban women from the battlefield because the battlefield is constantly shifting and by the very nature of the fact that those women choose to be a part of the military, they then become potential targets in the same way that any male soldier who is directly slated for combat also does. Whether you like to acknowledge it or not the current nature of warfare makes any woman who serves in the armed services a prospective player in direct combat.

Women serve in a variety of capacities from medics, truck drivers, and guards, to intelligence officers, military police and supply soldiers. Women are especially important when the US Army conducts house searches in Iraq. They accompany the infantrymen and assist by doing the body searches of women. In the past, male soldiers trying to search Iraqi women created a problematic situation because Muslim culture considers it improper and insulting for unfamiliar men to conduct searches of women's bodies. Female soldiers help diffuse some possible tension in those situations, making women not only an asset in those situations but necessary as well. Women have also proven their valor by earning purple hearts and other honours in Iraq as a small and limited example.

If women are willing to do these jobs, and their male counterparts feel confident entrusting themselves to these women, how can you who doesn't have to put himself out on the frontlines overlook the testimony of those who do? This view of yours isn't really about trying to protect women or state that women can't do the job; it's about trying to control them. Instead of acknowledging that women have a right to make their own decisions, you subscribe to the viewpoint that wants to dictate when and where women can put their bodies and how to use them. Likewise, debates about abortion and birth control are centered on how much control a woman should be able to exert over her own body. Women have the right to decide what risks they are willing to take - that is a question for them to decide, not for men to dictate.

You talk about women accepting equality and then refer to 'punching them in the neck' as an example of equality. Curiously, it has been a very long time since I had to punch somebody to make a point. Infact, well over half my life ago and that is fortunate, now that I know how and am pretty damn good at throwing punches and kicks.. . Equality or not, striking someone to prove a point or settle an argument is a sign of weakness pal. If you can't use your brain.. use your fist. Something about telling my client he is wrong and cannot do something and then punching him to prove the point just doesn't seem all that manly. Maybe taking a look at your own insecurities and weaknesses might point out why you feel so threatened that women should deserve equality with men.

I lived in South Africa, and I've seen inequality at it's basest form and I am ****ing amazed when I see thickheaded, narrowminded dumb as a bag of hammers opinions coming from individuals that have lead a privileged life where information and knowledge is all around them yet they inist on keeping it out of their heads.

Let me finish by pointing out one thing. If my daughter ever came home with an individual I heard refer to women as a 'broad'... I might just retract my earlier stance on proving my point with violence.

[Sensei]

THANK YOU MIKER! I was beginning to lose faith in my fellow man...

CC, Rhino, et. al, you know your OPINIONS may change if you ever get married to someone you respect and, heaven forbid, have a daughter...

[Built]

Ah … I didn't lose all faith in men.

Even though some of the perhaps less experienced men may seem to tar all women with the same brush, I don't do the same thing to all men. Some of my very best friends are men. Hell, I even MARRIED one. A few small voices aren't going to be enough to ruin my perception of men in general.

[Sensei]

I meant to say I was losing faith in the males of the forum here who were not speaking up. I would say that men have no problem with equality and respecting women. Boys, on the other hand....

;)

[body]

Lets look at some facts.

1. Rape is about one thing.. power or domination. It is NOT about the sex, love, passion or lust. If you cannot get past this very basic point.. you might as well quit reading.. the rest of this note will pass by you like JumboJet heading across the pond.

.

that is very narrow minded to say its just about one thing and is probably incorrect. Yes rape can be about power. But it can be for various other reasons as well.

http://iranscope.ghandchi.com/Anthology/Women/rape.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4687209.stm

though before some one mocks me for what ever reason for saying this. I would excute serial rapists.
the reason why people do a crime, does not alter people like myself and belial views on what the punishment should be and the sadness for the victims.

[Built]

Rape is about one thing.. power or domination. It is NOT about the sex, love, passion or lust. If you cannot get past this very basic point.. you might as well quit reading.. the rest of this note will pass by you like JumboJet heading across the pond.
that is very narrow minded to say its just about one thing and is probably incorrect. Yes rape can be about power. But it can be for various other reasons as well.

http://iranscope.ghandchi.com/Anthology/Women/rape.htm
Okay, well, the sociobiological viewpoint suggests it's about spreading genetic material, the ultimate show of power. I'm not "feeling the love" here. Nor passion, nor lust. Certainly sex - that's the medium. But sex out of power, not sex out of a need for any "emotional connection" with the victim.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4687209.stm
This one is about power, plain and simple. He can rape, therefore the others fear him.


though before some one mocks me for what ever reason for saying this. I would excute serial rapists.
the reason why people do a crime, does not alter people like myself and belial views on what the punishment should be and the sadness for the victims.

I don't think you and miker are on opposite sides of the fence here. Not from these links, anyway.

[Canadian Crippler]

As a general statement, what’s so odd about this? Couldn’t the same be said for men?Yes! Which is why we can't have a freakin' equality!


I don’t think anyone here would argue for anything else.Of course not. This is why when people say "equality is fairness", it's utter crap. They are fighting for their own advantage, not fairness.


But you’d have to be some sort of an idiot to think there are no barriers out there facing women. The old boys club is still going strong in our culture. I’ve been FIRED for refusing the sexual advances of my boss (and good LUCK proving it. I didn’t bother to try). Not sure if this has ever, or is ever likely to happen, to you (and no, he was NOT hot – he was a fat, middle aged creep).Women (as a group and as individuals) have come a long way. I agree that our culture is still strongly based around male dominance. But let's face it: It's a fact that generally woman are better at housekeeping, nursing, etc. while generally men are better in business, labour jobs, etc. Of course many woman will be good at these jobs too and many men can likely clean and cook profoundly. But to say that everyone is equal, that man is woman and woman is man is outright ridiculous. I just think much of society is starting to believe that there are no genetic difference here, when there clearly are.


I do NOT know what the solution is. Maybe you have some brilliant plan, Crip? Other than telling me what I don't want without asking me?To tell you the truth it doesn't matter to me whether or not women have the same exact rights or special ones. So long as they make sense. As in if you really, really want to be "equal" with men then actual be equal. No bull****, pay for dinner for ****s sake and get off the elevator before me. You're my EQUAL, remember?



2. The idea of equality can have many different meanings. In a strict sense, equality can require the same treatment of different people; however, another view of equality would require different treatment for different people in order to produce an equal result.I like this, more notably the last line. My point is that many of these woman activists aren't looking for an equal result, but rather an extreme result for woman.


3. Men have dicks, and Women don't.. yet.. believe it CC.. they are both humans and as such.. are equal when it comes to everything outside the physical.. although I know plenty of women rugby players that would feed you your teeth for using terms like 'broad' in reference to them making them more than your equal physically as well.I don't see when I argued they don't "match up" to men. And men and women really aren't equal in many aspects outside ofthe physical nature. I'm not sure if you're getting confused with how I use the word "equal", but I'm not saying woman are worst or better than men because we aren't equal. All I mean is we are different. We all do deserve equal rights and an equal oppurtunity to do whatever we wish to do with our lives, but we are still very different.


You.. CC, Rhyno etc. say that women don't really want equality... at least not the bad stuff. Yet.. they like having doors opened for them, and polite gestures made their way etc. Curiously, I enjoy it when a woman accepts these acts of kindness and politeness. I don't immediately think they are trying to get the good stuff without the bad.It's a natural reaction. Who would bid anything bad upon themselves? Men do the same, except society really only accepts it when women do it.


All of your arguments reference particular situations.. rather than taking a look at the big picture. Have you thought why women would want to discuss equality.. and please.. reference #2 above when thinking about this? Maybe because in all of history... it has only been in the last 20-80 years that women have seen any sort of movement made to treat them equally as humans, citizens, residents, professionals, persons etc. I know you are extremely young CC and haven't seen or experienced much firsthand when it comes to this subject. Women, at one point were treated as property and in some southern states and BC towns, they still are. They are used as glorified slaves and baby factories....meant only to provide sexual relief and domestic labour to the man of the house. They couldn't vote, drive, speak without permission etc. Now.. they want to be treated with equality. They want to be treated like they occupy as important a space on this planet as you do. Earning the same pay for doing the same job, having control over their own persons and making their own decisions without some man forcing them to follow his vision of their usefulness. Much of this has been dropped by the side now especially in Canada. Although there are still plenty of jobs where women earn less then men even though they do the same job.Ah yes, but this is 2005 not 1894. As I mentioned way above, women HAVE come a long way but so has everyone. I'm a jew. My people have been persucuted by over 18 nations, slaves to 3 of them for years and years, and almost wiped out by mad man JUST 50 years ago. Theres are hundreds of thousands of people still today who HATE us, maybe even millions! Yet you don't see any of us protesting, saying we need to be treated "equaly" and looking for special priveledges now do you?


I laughed out loud when you offered your opinion on women on the battlefield. For starters, you haven't a goddamned clue what kind of will and strength of character it takes to even make the committment to join the armed services let alone end up in a combat ready outfit. Women are just too sensitive in your eyes eh? But even if all your posturing about women in combat does originate out of an actual heartfelt concern about women's welfare, your opinions prove you haven't quite comprehended that war just isn't the way it used to be. Once upon a time two opposing sides would carve out a battlefield, dig a couple of trenches, lob some grenades, fire rifles at each other and take breaks in between. But as September 11th made it painfully clear to Americans, war no longer occupies a circumspect battlefield. Fighting occurs in cities and combat comes in small attacks, land mines and car bombs. Anything vaguely associated with the military becomes considered a target, even civilians. It's impossible to ban women from the battlefield because the battlefield is constantly shifting and by the very nature of the fact that those women choose to be a part of the military, they then become potential targets in the same way that any male soldier who is directly slated for combat also does. Whether you like to acknowledge it or not the current nature of warfare makes any woman who serves in the armed services a prospective player in direct combat.Thanks for the lesson in history and current events, Miker. Good work ignoring the obvious fact that I was referring to woman who are literally in squadrons invading enemy territory. Woman in a general sense are genetically weaker, slower, and all around less powerful and fit than men. So why would we want them doing a job that requires strength, speed, and all around fitness? (don't get on my case about how it takes more than that. We can both agree that these are VITAL parts of what it takes to be a soldier). To me it all spells trouble. As I said, if they can past the exact same tests the men are taking than all the power to them. But I've heard some feminists speaking of ratio systems, AA, etc. and that's a load of bull****.


Women serve in a variety of capacities from medics, truck drivers, and guards, to intelligence officers, military police and supply soldiers. Women are especially important when the US Army conducts house searches in Iraq. They accompany the infantrymen and assist by doing the body searches of women. In the past, male soldiers trying to search Iraqi women created a problematic situation because Muslim culture considers it improper and insulting for unfamiliar men to conduct searches of women's bodies. Female soldiers help diffuse some possible tension in those situations, making women not only an asset in those situations but necessary as well. Women have also proven their valor by earning purple hearts and other honours in Iraq as a small and limited example.Ok, I am sorry. I guess I just forgot that because the Muslim religion prohibits men from searching woman, that now it's ok for unqualified woman to enter the battlefield. :rolleyes:

Again, you failed to see where I was strictly referring woman performing act of an active soldier on the battlefield. As in, BANG BANG. Not coming in 4 hours after the invasion to help with battle wounds. I clearly remember saying that those are jobs in which most men AND women find suitable for women.


If women are willing to do these jobs, and their male counterparts feel confident entrusting themselves to these women, how can you who doesn't have to put himself out on the frontlines overlook the testimony of those who do? This view of yours isn't really about trying to protect women or state that women can't do the job; it's about trying to control them. Instead of acknowledging that women have a right to make their own decisions, you subscribe to the viewpoint that wants to dictate when and where women can put their bodies and how to use them. Likewise, debates about abortion and birth control are centered on how much control a woman should be able to exert over her own body. Women have the right to decide what risks they are willing to take - that is a question for them to decide, not for men to dictate.Jesus Christ, was I talking to a wall? Again, if woman are fully qualified to do these jobs then all the power to them. Handouts, AA, etc. are what piss me off.

And let's not get into abortion. It really has nothing to do with a woman's power over her own body but rather the baby's lack of power to decide if he want's to live or not.


You talk about women accepting equality and then refer to 'punching them in the neck' as an example of equality. Curiously, it has been a very long time since I had to punch somebody to make a point. Infact, well over half my life ago and that is fortunate, now that I know how and am pretty damn good at throwing punches and kicks.. . Equality or not, striking someone to prove a point or settle an argument is a sign of weakness pal. If you can't use your brain.. use your fist. Something about telling my client he is wrong and cannot do something and then punching him to prove the point just doesn't seem all that manly. Maybe taking a look at your own insecurities and weaknesses might point out why you feel so threatened that women should deserve equality with men.Yes, because I clearly stated I love to punch woman in the neck and that is how I solve my problems. :rolleyes:

It's an example, Mikey. An example amongst other examples.


I lived in South Africa, and I've seen inequality at it's basest form and I am ****ing amazed when I see thickheaded, narrowminded dumb as a bag of hammers opinions coming from individuals that have lead a privileged life where information and knowledge is all around them yet they inist on keeping it out of their heads.Oh look, it's a globe! Let's see where we're located... AH HA! North America! This isn't South Africa mikey.

It's quite obvious why many of my friend's familes moved here from South Africa in the past 15 years. The country blows, and it's ****ed up in everyway possible. I don't see how what happens there is relevant in this argument at all.


Let me finish by pointing out one thing. If my daughter ever came home with an individual I heard refer to women as a 'broad'... I might just retract my earlier stance on proving my point with violence.By broad I was referring to certain woman who tick me off, not woman in general. Feminists, JAPS, gabby bitches, etc.

[Miker]

that is very narrow minded to say its just about one thing and is probably incorrect. Yes rape can be about power. But it can be for various other reasons as well.

http://iranscope.ghandchi.com/Anthology/Women/rape.htm
Evolutionary psychology can be a bit like London's Millennium Dome. From the outside it affords an impressive structure, constructed with the help of cutting edge science and technology. But take a peek inside, and you often find an alarming scarcity of real content. So it is with A Natural History of Rape, the latest attempt to apply Darwinian theory to human behaviour.

Biologist Randy Thornhill and anthropologist Craig Palmer believe that human rape 'arises from men's evolved machinery for obtaining a high number of mates in an environment where females choose mates'. At the heart of their argument, as of all evolutionary psychology, is the claim that although we live in a space world, our skulls still house Stone Age minds. Human behaviours, Thornhill and Palmer argue, were originally designed by natural selection to facilitate the reproduction of our genes in our ancestral world. Many behaviours, such as rape, which may have been adaptive then, still haunt us now.

If men rape to increase their chance of fatherhood, women are traumatised by rape because it 'lowers their reproductive success'. Rape is painful, apparently, because it 'reduces a woman's ability to choose the timing and circumstances for reproduction, as well as her ability to choose the man who fathers her offspring'. And there I was thinking that the pain of rape had much to do with violence and forcible sex. Thornhill and Palmer, however, will have none of this. Rapists, they argue, do not as a rule use overmuch violence because they don't want to threaten their victim's chance of getting pregnant. Even more contentiously they believe that the trauma of rape decreases with more violent attacks, as injured women are more likely to be believed that they didn't 'ask for it'. The more battered a woman is, the less trauma she endures? It truly is an Alice-Through-The-Looking-Glass world that Thornhill and Palmer inhabit.

Thornhill and Palmer want all young men to receive 'an evolutionarily informed educational program' which 'gets them to acknowledge the power of their sexual impulses.' Teenagers should be taught 'why they get an erection just by looking at a photo of a naked woman' and why they might 'mistake a woman's friendly comment or her tight blouse as an invitation to have sex.' They must complete such a course before they can get a driving licence. Why evolutionary knowledge about rape should make young men better drivers, Thornhill and Palmer don't explain. But if they truly believe that such an educational programme will curb young men's sexual desires, then they must have long forgotten what it's like to be a teenage boy. The last way to change a teenager's mind is by force-feeding him an adult education programme.

A Natural History of Rape is a deeply dispiriting work that provides little insight into either human psychology or the character of rape. It's a pity because evolutionary biology has much to say about sexual behaviour. But the dogma that human behaviour can only be understood in evolutionary terms is as foolish as ignoring evolutionary theory altogether.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4687209.stm
let me quote from this article (which by the way has nothing to do with men raping women)
"Sometimes the person wants to show power, to have power over another prisoner. Sometimes by raping a fellow prisoner, that person can make even the warders fear them."

He added that this was the case with himself - although he denies he has actually been a rapist himself.

"They fear me," he said.

"I might look small to you, but I am strong - very strong. I fear nobody.

"I can rape, I can do whatever I want to anybody, and no-one will dare question me.

"That is power."


I rest my case. Try and research your links before you post them.

[Miker]

CC or Mitch as you are known by the side of the species in which you are trying your best to take your feelings of inadequacy out on... the fact you are jewish means a couple things...you know nothing about women on the battlefield invading enemy territory yelling bang bang.. .as you so eloquently put it and I am starting to wonder if you know anything about your own tribe's history.

On October 1, 1994, the Defense Department issued a policy that rescinded the so-called "risk rule" that gauges the specialties to which women can be assigned. The policy was backed strongly by Secretary of Defense Les Aspin and was the extension of the changes made in April 1993 that opened most aviation specialties, including attack helicopters, to women (Army, March 1994). The policy emphasized that no job will be closed to women just because it is dangerous, but fails to open direct offensive ground combat jobs to women (Army, March 1994). Even today, though, the official policy of the Army and Marine Corps excludes women from combat which precludes 12 percent of skilled positions and 39 percent of the total positions (GAO Report, July 1996)

An argument against women in combat is that they simply do not have the physical strength and endurance needed. Without a doubt, being in the military is a physically demanding job that not everyone is fit to handle. Despite this, all experts agree that there are some women, although perhaps small in number, who have the physical strength and endurance to be soldiers (Army Times, July 29, 1996). Concerning combat aviation some question whether women can handle the gravitational forces of an aircraft, but there is absolutely no evidence that says they cannot.

More than 40,000 American women served in the war against Iraq. The Marine Corps awarded twenty-three women the Combat Action Ribbon for service in the Persian Gulf War because they were engaged by Iraqi troops. Desert Storm was a huge turning point for women, much like Vietnam was for African-Americans, and it showed that modern war boundaries between combat and non-combat zones are being blurred. It makes no sense to cling to semantics (combat vs combat support) given the reality of war. Furthermore, allowing both men and women to compete for all military occupational specialties is not an equal rights issue, but one of military effectiveness. If the United States is to remain the world's most capable and most powerful military power, there is a need to have the best person in each job, regardless of their gender.

As for the rest of your bull**** arguments to my points.. you'll grow out of it.. I hope. The fact that I lived in SA and saw racism and tribalism and inequality at its worst.. is incredibly poignant now that I see your ****ed opinions.

[Canadian Crippler]

CC or Mitch as you are known by the side of the species in which you are trying your best to take your feelings of inadequacy out on... the fact you are jewish means a couple things...you know nothing about women on the battlefield invading enemy territory yelling bang bang.. .as you so eloquently put it and I am starting to wonder if you know anything about your own tribe's history.

On October 1, 1994, the Defense Department issued a policy that rescinded the so-called "risk rule" that gauges the specialties to which women can be assigned. The policy was backed strongly by Secretary of Defense Les Aspin and was the extension of the changes made in April 1993 that opened most aviation specialties, including attack helicopters, to women (Army, March 1994). The policy emphasized that no job will be closed to women just because it is dangerous, but fails to open direct offensive ground combat jobs to women (Army, March 1994). Even today, though, the official policy of the Army and Marine Corps excludes women from combat which precludes 12 percent of skilled positions and 39 percent of the total positions (GAO Report, July 1996)

An argument against women in combat is that they simply do not have the physical strength and endurance needed. Without a doubt, being in the military is a physically demanding job that not everyone is fit to handle. Despite this, all experts agree that there are some women, although perhaps small in number, who have the physical strength and endurance to be soldiers (Army Times, July 29, 1996). Concerning combat aviation some question whether women can handle the gravitational forces of an aircraft, but there is absolutely no evidence that says they cannot.

More than 40,000 American women served in the war against Iraq. The Marine Corps awarded twenty-three women the Combat Action Ribbon for service in the Persian Gulf War because they were engaged by Iraqi troops. Desert Storm was a huge turning point for women, much like Vietnam was for African-Americans, and it showed that modern war boundaries between combat and non-combat zones are being blurred. It makes no sense to cling to semantics (combat vs combat support) given the reality of war. Furthermore, allowing both men and women to compete for all military occupational specialties is not an equal rights issue, but one of military effectiveness. If the United States is to remain the world's most capable and most powerful military power, there is a need to have the best person in each job, regardless of their gender.Whether you copied this from another website or whether you actually wrote it up, you just wasted a lot of your time. You seem stuck on the idea that I don't think women should be serving in the army, period. I keep saying otherwise, but you don't seem to get it.

HERE WE GO, FOR THE LAST TIME: IF WOMEN CAN PASS THE QUALIFICATIONS THE MEN PASS THEN ALL THE POWER TO THEM. MY PROBLEM IS WITH ANYONE WHO THINKS THERE SHOULD BE A RATIO OF MEN AND WOMEN IN THE ARMY REGARDLESS OF QUALIFICATIONS. I'M ALSO FRUSTRATED WITH PEOPLE WHO SEEM TO THINK THAT WOMEN FROM A GENERAL STANDPOINT HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO BE IN THE ARMY JUST AS MUCH AS MEN DO; WHEN INFACT THIS IS NOT TRUE.

You also seem stuck up on this one idea of women in the army, when in fact it was one of my lesser points of the few. Maybe you should rebuttel my other statements rather than misinterpreting one of them and calling the rest bull****.

[Alex.V]

I'm just tremendously surprised that, for some reason, my intentionally innocuous point was taken so out of context.

Rape is often misunderstood, it is oversimplified, and used as a political point or a good way to get up on a soapbox and draw spurious conclusions that often result in the true point in an argument being reduced to sound bites and speaking points.

The line I had a problem with was this one:

"Our culture has sexualized power. That's why rape is a crime of violence, not passion."

This is simply not true. You can't differentiate power, sex, dominance, and the like. They are all intertwined as part of human nature. It is NOT a cultural phenomenon.

This was my only point. it had NOTHING to do with diminishing its impact, or making judgements as to how it should be properly punished, etc. etc.

That said, both sides are arguing like *******s.

Have some respect, stop the condescension, and occasionally acknowledge when your opponent makes a point, rather than patronizing your way past each and every one.

Damn, kids, get along.

[Gyno Rhino]

CC or Mitch as you are known by the side of the species in which you are trying your best to take your feelings of inadequacy out on...

Keep it civil.

I've had to bow out of this argument, because it's quite clear that most people on the side of the "OMG WOMEN SHOULD SOOOO BE EQUAL CAUSE HAVING BOOBS DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE DUMB OMG LOL!11!!" side seem to be discussing with a great deal of emotion. And ignoring the entire point of the discussion.

[Gyno Rhino]

In fact, after rereading the last five or so posts, it's clear that this is over.

[Built]

Sorry, I've been busy too busy cooking and cleaning to keep up...did I miss anything?

[Sensei]

By broad I was referring to certain woman who tick me off, not woman in general. Feminists, JAPS, gabby bitches, etc.

Before I totally write you off as a human being, could you please explain this statement?

[CoRe]

A 14 year old does not have the mental maturity to have consensual sex with an adult. It would be very easy to confuse a kid of this age, especially if you're an attractive blonde whom just happens to be an authority figure. Sure, it's a wonderful dream for most kids as this is the stage in life where they are raging with hormones, but that doesn't negate the fact that they aren't mature. There is a reason why suffrage is set at 18 years of age.

Besides, how can you justify this action with a teenage boy and not a teenage girl? Are you implying that boys are more mature than girls at the age of 14? If it's not a maturity issue, what possible justification could exist?

Bottom line, Lafave broke the law. The law makes no exception for consensual sex with a minor, it's illegal, period. You let her slide, then there is a precedent for other cases, many which will involve older men with young girls. It's a slippery slope that we don't need to travel.

14 is of age here in Canada, i guess we mature faster

[pinky8713]

Send her to jail!

[Built]

Yep.

[Canadian Crippler]

Before I totally write you off as a human being, could you please explain this statement?What's there to explain? I used the word broad. Someone thought I was referring to all woman. I was referring to women who piss me off; feminists, JAPS, and gabby whores specifically but not exclusively. Ya know, you hate someone you call them a jackass. Or a clown. Maybe an *******. Same deal here.

EDIT: Here it is. "Jessica Lynch for example; wtf was that broad doing in the army?"

[body]

let me quote from this article (which by the way has nothing to do with men raping women)
"Sometimes the person wants to show power, to have power over another prisoner. Sometimes by raping a fellow prisoner, that person can make even the warders fear them."

He added that this was the case with himself - although he denies he has actually been a rapist himself.

"They fear me," he said.

"I might look small to you, but I am strong - very strong. I fear nobody.

"I can rape, I can do whatever I want to anybody, and no-one will dare question me.

"That is power."


I rest my case. Try and research your links before you post them.

"Prisoners are just human beings," said Emmanuel Wetangula, a lawyer in one of Kenya's leading law firms.

"They do have sexual needs which they have to attend to. They do not get conjugal visits from their wives or girlfriends."

I did read the link. The link states it happens for more than one reason.

as it for men on men, well if you had mixed prisons, women are likely to be raped not only through power, but through men wanting to have sex. SOme might like the fact they get off on a power trip at the same time, others may not care and just want sex with no other intention but to enjoy themselves and relieve there urges.

People have been brought up better now than they did 100's years ago. There are laws (and more chance of being caught) and more morals for womens rights. So the risks out weigh there potential rewards. thus the one wanting just sex will find other avenues to have sex etc. while the ones still on a power trip will see it as more there right and carry on regardless.

[body]

Okay, well, the sociobiological viewpoint suggests it's about spreading genetic material, the ultimate show of power. I'm not "feeling the love" here. Nor passion, nor lust. Certainly sex - that's the medium. But sex out of power, not sex out of a need for any "emotional connection" with the victim.

I don't think you and miker are on opposite sides of the fence here. Not from these links, anyway.

I think one of the issues in this topic. Is that we have not defined the word "power" as it does cover a lot things.
As rape is bascially having sex with out permission. But a lot of women (and men) will agree to have sex, thus its not rape. But the reasons for having sex are the same to pass on your genetics etc. Its just that your allowed to do it. so would you agree that a lot of sex wether consent or not is done for power?
do people who have one night stands, are they after a quick fling or want to show women that they strong by having many partners? though different people may do it for different reasons.

One of my friends is a dad as his GF lied and told him she was on the pill, when she was not. is this a power thing?

I will still believe that people have raped due to wanting sex especially years ago, when you had male armies going a long time without sex and when invaded foriegn land. They saw women and just wanted sex. Like i said above they had sexual urges and there morals and how they were broguth up to treat people was different. I am not justifing it and if it happend today I would say they should stand for war crimes.

[Wierz]

What's there to explain? I used the word broad. Someone thought I was referring to all woman. I was referring to women who piss me off; feminists, JAPS, and gabby whores specifically but not exclusively. Ya know, you hate someone you call them a jackass. Or a clown. Maybe an *******. Same deal here.


I'm not sure what you mean by "JAPS" but I think you might mean something different than what I know it as. Where I'm from, it's a racial slur for people who live in Japan. That might be why people were upset about this. Did you mean something different?

[Canadian Crippler]

ROFL. Yes, I mean something else. J.A.P = Jewish American Princess. aka spoiled, rotten, bratty, "OMG LIEK THOSE SHOEZ R SO COOL!!!1" smug bitches. Think Paris Hilton.

Not sure if this word is used outside of the jewish community, lol.