Does rape exist?

[GL_in_Lyrics]

I've already said that feminism is responsible for some very heinous atrocities, including anti-pedophilia, and the circumcision of the male continuing. This is what happens when you give women "equal rights". However, feminism has given women rights far, far above men. Equality starts at birth, and males do not even have the right starting at birth to keep all of their genitalia!

I still don't understand why you believe feminism is bad. You can say the same thing about pedophilia, you can say pedophilia is bad because many use pro-contact and pro-map to kidnap and rape children instead of actually having consensual sex.

Also, tell me where feminism is for circumcision, I think you're just uneducated on it.
A lot of what you say is related to religion, which feminism is against most of the time due to it also oppressing women and mutilating boys.




Pitts-Taylor, Victoria (2008). Cultural Encyclopedia of the Body [2 volumes]. ABC-CLIO. p. 394. ISBN 978-1-56720-691-3. For most part, Christianity does not require circumcision of its followers. Yet, some Orthodox and African Christian groups do require circumcision. These circumcisions take place at any point between birth and puberty.

Rosner, Fred (2003). Encyclopedia of Jewish Medical Ethics. Feldheim Publishers. p. 196. ISBN 978-1-58330-592-8. Several eras in subsequent Jewish history were associated with forced conversions and with prohibitions against ritual circumcision... Jews endangered their lives during such times and exerted strenuous efforts to nullify such edicts. When they succeeded, they celebrated by declaring a holiday. Throughout most of history, Jews never doubted their obligation to observe circumcision... [those who attempted to reverse it or failed to perform the ritual were called] voiders of the covenant of Abraham our father, and they have no portion in the World to Come.

Gruenbaum, Ellen (2015). The Female Circumcision Controversy: An Anthropological Perspective. University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 61. ISBN 9780812292510. Christian theology generally interprets male circumcision to be an Old Testament rule that is no longer an obligation ... though in many countries (especially the United States and Sub-Saharan Africa, but not so much in Europe) it is widely practiced among Christians

I do believe much of what we support aligns, it's just the understanding of where it comes from that separates us. I 100% agree with your stance on circumcision, only true relation between feminism and "circumcision" is being against female genital mutilation, while I believe they should put more effort into male circumcision, especially because we see it more, it is not as damaging as female genital mutilation, which happens at an older age and damages multiple organs.

You still seem to think I'm going to engage in some serious debate with you, but that won't happen, because I know I cannot change your mind due to how brainwashed you are. You're clearly being processed through some Western schooling system... and that's scary.

If you don't believe me that feminists are responsible for male circumcision continuing, I suggest looking up the following names and their stances on circumcision:

- Hillary Clinton
- Oprah Winfrey
- Sandra Bullock
- P!nk
- Taylor Swift

And as I've said before, just do some easy research on what traditional feminists have said about males and their rights.

I do not deny that there are many anti-circumcision feminists, and feminists that do truly want equality for both genders. But the feminists that count, the feminists with the power to make a difference, are EXACTLY as I say.

Even if I were wrong, which I am not, there is no denying that feminism is pro-abortion, and that is seriously demented.

[Coyotehh]

There are MAPs who are for circumcision, I don't call MAPs terrorists because I understand one persons opinion does not correlate with an entire movement.
Never said feminism was against abortion, dont get me started on that.


Quick question, do you believe abortion should be banned in all cases? Including
Rape/Forced impregnation
Child impregnation
A parent wanting a children, but later finding out that the pregnancy has gone wrong and must be terminated, in which they still wish they could of kept the baby, but will both end up dying due to complications.
Failed protection?

[DANAT4T]

I will only give my opinion.

Rape is real, I can't see why anyone would think it isn't. It is forcing someone to do something they don't want to do. If they choose and want to do it then it isn't rape. There is a distinction between aggressive sex or even play rape with consent and real rape. Rape is a common fantasy for many women but that doesn't mean they actually want to be raped.

There is a strange effect in society where men feel very nervous about being dominant. I mean many women want their partner to lead in a relationship, like to be "taken" sometimes. It can be a real turn-off to have a partner keep asking for permission during sex and apologising constantly during sex. I've slept with guys like that, they keep asking "is this OK?" and "can I do this?" and then it's "sorry about this or that". Meanwhile I'm rolling my eyes just saying "just get on with it". Or going out and I do think many men are too afraid to even try for a one night stand, are afraid even to pay a compliment in case they're accused of being sex crazed men. Many women I know dislike it when men are too wishy washy, frankly we want a man to be a man and take charge at times. I've had rape fantasies, it's common. But that doesn't mean I want no say in it and I don't want to be actually raped against my will. There is a difference. A guy I don't know or don't like just raping me would be awful, but I guy I like who wanted to play rape with me and if I was in that mood would be fun.

Society has made it difficult for men to be alpha type men and there are many women who want men like that. But I don't know any women who want to actually be raped, even if they fantasise about it. I might get excited by a horror movie, it doesn't mean I want to be in one. It all comes down to consent but I don't think men should be too afraid to seek consent.

Consent is such an important thing in the world that I think children should be taught about it very early and be allowed to express it. AoC laws are harmful here because it means young people don't have to think about consent until they are of age and then suddenly it's a thing. Young people should be taught about consent, should be allowed to give it or withhold it. This is understood in law and medicine with things like Gillick Competence frameworks, where a child's consent has meaning for surgery and other medical applications, a child can consent to treatment without parental knowledge of control. In law, a child can be accountable for their actions, they have the competence to decide right and wrong. For for sex, a powerful driver for so many young people, they have no right to consent, boys or girls, it isn't something to think about. Then they're old enough and it's new and so they get it wrong so often, rapes and violent, unpleasant sexual experiences. Society has chosen to set up children to be put in danger when they enter adulthood and have chosen to remove the learning needed to understand and apply consent. Whether this is because some groups want vulnerable young adults or whether it's genuine misunderstanding of the value of consent, I don't know.

Rapes are the consequences sadly, the fact that this is being asked in my opinion is just a symptom of how young people are not taught about consent and don't learn to give or deny it as a result of AoC laws and so in adulthood, it's too late to really grasp the importance of it.

That is the most stupid post I ever read.

[GL_in_Lyrics]

There are MAPs who are for circumcision, I don't call MAPs terrorists because I understand one persons opinion does not correlate with an entire movement.
Never said feminism was against abortion, dont get me started on that.


Quick question, do you believe abortion should be banned in all cases? Including
Rape/Forced impregnation
Child impregnation
A parent wanting a children, but later finding out that the pregnancy has gone wrong and must be terminated, in which they still wish they could of kept the baby, but will both end up dying due to complications.
Failed protection?

Um, yes, abortion should be outlawed in all, and every case.

A "child" who gets pregnant is not a child at all.

And I will not be explaining any of my positions on this to YOU.

The names i gave you regarding circumcision are high-status people with a lot of power. THEY are the ones with the voice, and THEY are the ones who are pro-circumcision. I don't care what mere, ignorant peasants believe.

Seems we're going 'round in circles now, so unless you have something *new* to say, we're done here, me thinks.

[Coyotehh]

A "child" who gets pregnant is not a child at all.

The fact you think a 5 year old isn't a child tells me enough about you. (Lina Medina)
You'd also rather kill "two" people instead of one, your opinions are funny considering they come from someone who has and never will experience pregnancy.

[lovoy]

Um, yes, abortion should be outlawed in all, and every case.

Yes, for any sensible person that statement is the end of any discussion.

[Artaxerxes II]

Given how the rules here are relaxed, I guess asking a few questions on something as controversial as rape wouldn’t hurt. Note that I don’t condone any illegal activity and I’m against any forceful and/or coercive sexual activity regardless of who did it, and that this post is solely meant as an academic discussion.

So, let’s begin by a brief intro to it: While all human societies have some sexual mores, said mores often varied based on the participants and whether sex was to be viewed exclusively for reproduction or pleasure, and those mores include ways to deal with forceful sexual conduct. But, given how most of the world derives its modern laws on sex from the West (either due to colonialism or westernisers introducing said laws), this post will only focus on how rape was treated in Western history.

For starters, until very few centuries ago, rape was often seen as a violation of (the father’s/husband’s) private property. In fact, this is reflected on the etymology of the term “rape”, itself is derived the middle English term “rapen” which in turn is derived from the Latin inflection of “rapio” (to snatch). Ancient Greece didn’t have any laws against it, and it wouldn’t be until ancient Rome that we would see the first western legislation against rape, and even then, it was constructed as a violation of private property, with the victim being just as guilty. Before moving on, I should note that due to how such laws were made only female free citizens could be legally seen as victims, with slaves not being considered, but as far as I know male victims of rape probably weren’t counted, but I could be missing some info.

This view of rape being nothing more than violation of private property (i.e., a wife or a daughter or any female under a man’s ownership) would continue through the middle ages up until modern times due to the proto-feminist movement that started in the 18th century across the occident. But not all changes were equal, with war rape (of females, keep in mind that male rape was treated as no different than sodomy back in the days) being seen as no different than looting an enemy’s treasure and it wouldn’t receive prosecution until the precedent set by the international court right after the end of the Yugoslavian wars in the 1990s.

So, why was rape seen as a bad thing in the Western past? Mostly because rape essentially took away a woman’s “virtue” (i.e., her virginity, and by default the certainty that paternity fraud wouldn’t be committed), making her valueless in terms of marriageability, which also explain why “marry-your-rapist”-type laws were made to begin with, to ensure that the female could be taken care of. It was this imagery that feminist would exploit for their emotionally charged campaigns, then and now.

And so here we are, now the (Western legal) definition of rape changed from property violation to any non-consensual act that involves penetration (although its definition has been extended by feminists to push their agenda, with the latter point being challenged in recent times).

Anyone here can feel free to correct me on any of the historical claims that I made in this post.

So, what’s my issue with it? It’s this: When we normally talk of “rape” (the classical type, not statutory), we think of male-on-female rape. But as we’ve seen before, the legal definition for it changed in the past, with the legislation only including female victims of male rapists. As such, rape is more of a legal term that is taken as synonymous with forceful sex in colloquial terms. And let’s not get on the conundrum as to whether rape must involve penetration. And, if we were to go against sexceptionalism, then shouldn’t any rape law be abolished and replaced or absorbed under a legislation against assault or battery?

So, without further ado, here are some questions that I’ve got:

Should rape be seen as a violation of private property, like in pre-contemporary Western history, or as any non-consensual sexual activity?

Should a person (male or female) be counted as being raped only if they were penetrated against their will?

Given the legal history, should male rape victims at the hand of other males be treated as accomplices for sodomy (like in the past anti-sodomy/buggey laws) or be treated in the same way the modern West treats female rape victims?

If we insist that being penetrated is not a necessary criterion for being deemed as a rape victim if any penetrative act was involved, then can the unwilling person “being forced to penetrate” be sufficient for said person be considered a rape victim? If not, then that means that any female-on-male rape that doesn’t involve pegging or penetration by foreign object can’t be considered as rape.

Is forceful penetration a necessary criterion for the unwilling person to be deemed as a rape victim? If yes, then any case of female-on-female rape that doesn’t involve penetration by foreign object (including strap-ons) can’t be considered to be rape.

Is sex by deception (which is legal in all countries) rape even if it makes consent void as consent is just liberal contract theory applied to sexual matters?

[GL_in_Lyrics]

Um, yes, abortion should be outlawed in all, and every case.

Yes, for any sensible person that statement is the end of any discussion.

Yet, let's face it: Most abortions are not done because of rape or other etc complications. Most abortions are performed because *women* cannot take responsibility or accountability for their actions, and keep their legs together. Aborted babies feel pain as they are literally ripped apart.

And also, the world should NOT revolve around women. *Children* are MORE important than women! There it is, I said it!

[Artaxerxes II]

Um, yes, abortion should be outlawed in all, and every case.

Yes, for any sensible person that statement is the end of any discussion.

Yet, let's face it: Most abortions are not done because of rape or other etc complications. Most abortions are performed because *women* cannot take responsibility or accountability for their actions, and keep their legs together. Aborted babies feel pain as they are literally ripped apart.

And also, the world should NOT revolve around women. *Children* are MORE important than women! There it is, I said it!

The problem with your position is that you assert abortion must be inherently bad without taking into account utilitarian reasons behind an abortion as society often overlooks pain if the outcome is deemed as being “worth it” (e.g., enduring bullying in school to get graduated and increase chances of employment). The only way you can consistently be against abortion is if you supported the notion of ensoulment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ensoulment