Search results

Poisoning the Well. -5 points. By putting the words 'you decided' you're inserting an implication of consent, when we're specifically talking about situations in which the party did not or could not give anything resembling any reasonable definition of consent. I know the list of logical...

'False equivalence' is a formal fallacy and has a definition, asshole. Again, words have meanings.

It's the current legal definition of rape. The actual degree varies by state. I do think taking advantage of someone for sex when they're in a compromised state, but no lasting physical injuries are inflicted, should be considered a lower degree of sexual assault than forcible or violent rape...

There's no proof that a fusion reactor would ever be possible. You could throw infinite money at fusion power and still not get anything. The solar road shit could work given infinite money, but it's still fucking stupid.

It is when you're equipped for it. What's funny is that on the other forum I post on frequently about such topics, I'm being attacked for defending men with statistics and arguments that: 1) Almost all of the rapes (in the US) are committed by only a small percentage of men, about 6%, who...

There's gotta be a lot better ways to do renewable energy than driving on solar panels...

That's not an example of a false equivalence. Any metaphorical comparison is not a false equivalence. False equivalence is when one claims two things are equivalent when they are only share one element or characteristic. There are multiple congruities between the situations I'm comparing...

Not fixed. I'm not saying if the girl is clearly giving it away when she's drunk, or thrusts her head in your lap and blows you while she's drunk, that that's rape. Because that would be fucking dumb. But if you have to actively and willfully coerce, 'exploit' or 'take advantage' of the girl...

So if you're drunk and let a girl into your house, you wake up and all your shit is stolen... is that not a crime? Would you not report it? You made a bad decision, but it took someone else to take advantage of that bad decision before it became a crime.

Edited above post. You should read your own material before you link it. Your link supports my argument if you actually read it.

Report date 1996. We have both better statistics and I think DNA evidence is a bit better now. Reading further, it's also a report about something completely irrelevant. It's some organizations using legal babel trying to call into question DNA evidence, back when DNA evidence was still...

The same way you do any statistical inference from a sample to a population.

The chart should say rapes, not rapists. It would be accurate then, but still overestimate the number of false accusations. The 5-10% figure is of rapes that go to trial.

(There's a few minor statistical problems with the chart in question, both in favor and against the point, the number of unreported rates is slightly inflated, but the number of false accusations is also slightly inflated, but it's very close to accurate.)

Access to a woman's body is clearly worth about 20 bucks. A BJ from a toothless mulatto tranny costs more than that.

You didn't answer my points at all. How is it different from the example I gave?

FALSE FUCKING EQUIVALENCE? Are you saying that a woman's body is not something of value that can be violated?

If any evidence of the crime existed, you would still want to have it investigated, and if the perpetrator was identified, you would still want a judge or jury to rule on the case. I'm not saying the accuser should be always found right or the accused always found guilty; that's what we have...

I think anyone, of any gender, that gets intoxicated and puts themselves into dangerous situations is an irresponsible idiot, but I don't go so far as to say they deserve to be raped, unlike you psychopaths. Now that I've got all the ammo I need, let's turn this around real fast and use your...

You do a disservice to all humans, you should probably stay out of the argument entirely. By the very act of participating in any discussion, you make your side look worse.

She'd be responsible for any crimes committed because if there is a crime, there needs to be a guilty party. In this case, we've got a guilty party, YOU.

No, we're specifically talking about situations where one party doesn't know exactly what they're doing. That's the whole fucking point of the argument. If one party isn't exactly aware of what they're doing, it's rape. That's the whole fucking definition of consent. If you can only get...

You're just using a semantic argument to rationalize/justify rape.

Men can DEFINITELY be raped by women in these situations of questionable judgement. I was using gender neutral language AND conceding the point of both parties being drunk until people Cad started talking like an absolute psychopath.

Are you saying it's impossible for men to just to error on the side of basic human decency in borderline cases? You're just insulting yourself and your own gender by saying you can't take the high road because the only way you can get sex is to take advantage a girl in a vulnerable state.

I'm agreeing with you anyway in this case. If the girl is drunk but still clearly the initiator/aggressor, then it's almost definitely not rape. If the girl is drunk and still saying no, or has to be 'exploited' or 'taken advantage of' using Cad's own words, it's fucking rape. This should be...

Do you know how to use anything BUT strawman arguments?

You're really just digging yourself a deeper hole by using words like 'exploit' and 'take advantage.' That's definitely rape. Arbitrary's example of girl gets drunk, throws herself ontop of guy is at least questionable and almost definitely not rape. There's a big difference between a girl...

I covered this a few posts up. *I* don't think it's rape when both parties are intoxicated, unless of course one party specifically got both parties intoxicated for the purposes of making the other more vulnerable while getting themselves in a rapey kinda mood. This is one of the ways women...

If you actually think that way, then you might be a rapist. That you fully admit it's taking advantage of someone, but then somehow distinguish that from rape, is really just a way of rationalizing rape.

You should leave cryptic clues that lead on a long trail to nowhere.

Given how shitty LPH is and other passive forms of healing, toughness from HPs is no worse than toughness from armor/resists for a Wizard. Orbs and potions heal a percentage of max health.

Reviews for this game are really solid... are they just lying?

The way I've always seen it, if BOTH parties are under the influence to the point of neither being in control of their actions, then it can't be called rape. If one party intentionally gets the other party intoxicated for the purposes of having sex, or takes advantage of an already intoxicated...

No, you're wrong. 20% is pretty accurate for real actual rape. Those 6% of men that are committing most of the rapes really get around, and college aged girls are the most vulnerable targets. If you want to expand it to all unwanted sexual contact, it's around 75%. But it's still not an...

Speaking of words that have meanings, so-called feminists on twitter are making my head fucking explode. I keep seeing the phrase "epidemic of rapes" being tossed around, when rapes per capita are down 85% in the US in the past 40 years despite increased reporting rates. 100% decline sure...

People with a genetic predisposition towards being fat would be more likely to survive an ice age but the rest of that is fucking hilariously pants on head retarded.

You're an idiot. There's no biological basis for the sociological concept of 'race.' That doesn't mean there aren't genetic characteristics found more commonly among certain ethnic groups. Do you know anything about what these words mean?

If you're going to go the interviewer manipulation route, that most likely means that even more white people are psychopaths, as they're more likely to convince white interviewers that they're not.