Society lets you go from an asshole to "truther" with one word

[DonFerrari]

theprof00 said:

DonFerrari said:

Unless you are talking about people liveing in places where the law prohibit them from having the option (well it would still be an option, but I wouldn't hold against the person if not able to take the option) then it's an option. Lacking any will power to stand by what you believe and want and them screaming "rape" isn't even close to right.

Nobody is "screaming rape". Like I said, you're looking at it from your own viewpoint, like people can do whatever they want and if they aren't strong, then they fall back on a crutch. It's seriously arrogant bro. I don't blame people for the decisions they make. I don't blame people for the strength of their character. Everyone has their place, and yes there ARE too many thin skinned people out there. But that does not make the issue black and white.

Honestly I don't know you personally, so I can't really think of a metaphor. But maybe it would be similar to something like having to fight someone when you didn't want to. Have you ever been in a situation where you were being punked in front of a lot of people and knew you had to do something? Did you run or did you fight? Is either situation right? no. But you can tell that the person is pressuring you into fighting, right?

Like I said, I don't know you, but this situation is no different from many others. I could name a dozen different things where you might be pressured on something and emotion plays a factor as well. Just because something is an option, it doesn't mean everyone has the strength to make the right decision. And like I said, nobody is "screaming rape". As I mentioned earlier, a very good number don't ever say anything for various reasons. Most rape isn't reported. For example, I know 4 girls who have been forcibly or coercively had to have sex. None reported it.

Man... I'm sorry to say to you, but SJWs scream rape for even flerting. So yep there are a very big number of big mouths that say "forced sex' (and they push a lot of things under being forced) or lying about yourself to have sex as rape or sexual assault. So perhaps you were thinking about your definition of rape and not about what is in OP that is talking about SJWs.

If you don't blame the person for their lack of strenght in character then it's very hard as well to put them as suach victims that you have to reverse the guilty on the person that have it's his way. The primary responsible for his own safety and well being is the person themself and we have been failing as a society on it for a long time since the SJWs decided to make themselves the holders of all things good.

Being in a fight you don't want to be (and as option inside my argument would be walk away... so you aren't mandated to fight) is different than being in a consensual relationship that you opted to enter and can leave. And I suffered bullying from 10 to 18y so I'm very familiar with the situation, but I don't care because I never let it damage me.

And dozen of analagous situations isn't the same as this situation, so perhaps you wouldn't even put them because they wouldn't validate your point unless spin is involved.

theprof00 said:
This is how I see your view, Don.

I am a guy. I am with a girl. If she doesn't want to have sex on a certain day, she doesn't have to. We are both independent, she has her own place and I have mine, and we both have our own friends. A relationship is just two people spending time together with some feelings involved and sex.

If a girl doesn't want sex, then she shouldn't be in a relationship with that person. And should call it off so that she can find someone she does want to have sex with or be with. If I didn't want to have sex with some girl anymore, I would just leave. It only makes sense that if you're not into someone, you leave.

Would you say this is more or less how you think about this?

That is exactly what I have been saying. If you don't want to share the experiences with that someone you better not keep having the relationship, instead of selfshily keeping that person attached to you even though you want only to satisfy your needs and not the needs of the other part (be it love, sex, travels, etc), if both can't come to a common ground where both feel like they are being satisfied to be together them there is no good reason to keeping it up. (And as I said, talking about where the option to walk away is acceptable. Because again as I said, if law prohibited or the person would have very bad result from walking away, like gamily abandoning and starving I wouldn't hold it against the person, even if I think for myself that it would be a better option than living with someone you don't want to).

And about ethnicity... by your second bullet you could put yourself as evaluating etnocentrically because you are using your experience as a ruler to measure reality even more than I'm.

pearljammer said:

DonFerrari said:

 

Yep, you may say it's archaic... but if you don't want to have a sexual relationship with someone you can just quit the relationship, not demand that the other keep the relationship with you without any right to sex, you are the one that is thinking that the right of one is bigger than the other. I'm just saying that you either are together to have both happy and satisfied or you should be separated, not one pushing his will over the other because he want to be together but only if by the way to be.

 

But perhaps you are doing exactly like the guy before and reading what isn't written instead of what is.

 

Okay, I'm quite sure I'd gleaned what you'd meant the first time. No one has the right to have sex with someone. I'm not thinking that one right is greater than the other, I'm saying that one is simply not a right at all. It's both oddly specific and bordering ownership.

Since when have rights reached into other peoples' personhood (I suppose one could bring up abortion here, but I think there's an obvious disconnect).

" I'm just saying that you either are together to have both happy and satisfied or you should be separated" - People are regularly far more complicated than this. Relations aren't binary. If my wife doesn't wish to have sex tonight, I absolutely have no right to her body regardless of our relationship status. 

theprof00 said:
This is how I see your view, Don.

I am a guy. I am with a girl. If she doesn't want to have sex on a certain day, she doesn't have to. We are both independent, she has her own place and I have mine, and we both have our own friends. A relationship is just two people spending time together with some feelings involved and sex.

If a girl doesn't want sex, then she shouldn't be in a relationship with that person. And should call it off so that she can find someone she does want to have sex with or be with. If I didn't want to have sex with some girl anymore, I would just leave. It only makes sense that if you're not into someone, you leave.

Would you say this is more or less how you think about this?

I thought that was perhaps what he'd meant. He doubled done on the whole 'right' thing though.

Nope man.

If you want sex one night or another and the other person doesn't want it, it's part of relationship. Now if you don't want to have sex at all and the other person want a lot of sex, and you say the part that doesn't have more right to not want because its their body than the other that is also part of the relationship and live of the other then something is very off.