(January 18, 2018 at 2:25 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Let's go back to the comment I made. It was this:

(January 16, 2018 at 5:52 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I agree.

Maybe we should try getting to the root of the problem? Promote sexual morality and respect for self and others. Discourage hook up culture. Discourage porn use. Discourage men and women using each other in bed...

Promote the radical idea that sex is a language of self giving love and commitment.

Now there's a thought.

I dont mention religion or being religious at all here, and it was by no means meant to be a religious comment.

A person need not be Catholic to have this view of sex, and Im sure there are atheists out there who also think that hook up culture/porn/using each other in bed is unhealthy and counterproductive to having a better sense of respect for other people. I'm sure there are atheists who also think it's a positive thing for sex to be a language of self giving love and commitment to another person, verses just using each other for pleasure in a one night stand. This can be just as much a humanist approach, and Catholicism doesn't have ownership to this, just as it doesn't have ownership to many other views on morality.  

I'd like to think I'd still have this view of sexuality even if I wasn't religious... simply because it seems the healthiest and makes the most logical sense to me. I made that comment because I was voicing my honest response to the post above it. I in no way meant to push Catholic agenda by doing so (still not sure what that even means).

CL, let me tell you why I want to be extra clear that I’m not offended by that post and while I disagree, I still understand how someone can think that way.
It’s important to me, because you and I have participated in threads in which I was actually offended and felt deeply about my counter arguments, threads which were also about sexual assault. That was actually the first interaction I ever had with you, I think. Ever since then I try to keep away from rapey threads, to avoid conflict and unnecessary stress. I promised myself I’d keep calm during the duration of this one, because I found it interesting to discuss and to see how people feel about this specific case. I’m happy to see I’ve kept my cool, and more importantly, that I haven’t even seen anything that could offend me. Perhaps I’m growing up, too (like pool lol)? And the thing is that I really do understand where you’re coming from there, even when I disagree. In this particular case. I still feel strongly about my disagreements regarding other issues, but I want to be super clear that I don’t feel like that post was offensive.

Omg I’m being so redundant today lol

"So redundant" is redundant.

(January 18, 2018 at 2:43 pm)J a c k Wrote: Omg I’m being so redundant today lol

If you're anything like me... you can get used to that

(January 18, 2018 at 2:45 pm)Cyberman Wrote: "So redundant" is redundant.

Careful you don't just make it redundanter.

(January 18, 2018 at 1:01 pm)Khemikal Wrote: "But the bitch was naked, ofc she wanted to fuck!"

That’s not even remotely the question CL just asked, lol.  You guys are being silly now.

I just gave a hypothetical rapists defense, is all. It's no sweat off my sack if it's too close for comfort or has to be argued down and away. I keep suggesting that this is probably the more interesting conversation to have anyway, but hey..

One has to ask what effect vulgarity has on perceptions of guilt.

What if I had said. "She'd taken her close off, so I genuinely thought that I had consent. She seemed very interested.".

(January 18, 2018 at 2:36 pm)Hammy Wrote:

(January 18, 2018 at 2:06 pm)SaStrike Wrote: Yes finally. What are the other agendas? And who is pushing them?

Well my agenda is to make sure The Jews take their revenge on the Germans by taking over the world. How about yours?

---

(January 18, 2018 at 2:32 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: Nope not into sex bots . all my partners are real . And nothing i have written implies otherwise.

If they looked, sounded and behaved perfectly human I'd totally be up for it!

That'll never happen though. The way sex robots are right now....... it's all just insanely creepy.

I'm not sure your responding to the right comment . I assure all my partners are real women .

(January 18, 2018 at 2:55 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(January 18, 2018 at 1:01 pm)Khemikal Wrote: "But the bitch was naked, ofc she wanted to fuck!"

That’s not even remotely the question CL just asked, lol.  You guys are being silly now.

A-yup. And you know what's next? If she's on top riding a dude and she suddenly sneezes at the exact moment when she was about to say "Stop letting me ride your dick" (It's like "stop hitting yourself" only more imaginary feminazi-y (I don't actually believe in the existence of femmy nazz-ees)) then for that split second that she's sneezing he's raping her V with his pussay ridden P.

NOTHING WRONG WITH BEING SILLY.

(January 18, 2018 at 2:25 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:

(January 18, 2018 at 1:49 pm)Hammy Wrote: No it isn't (although actually, yes, it is if I'm my not staying in the mood means I no longer consent). The most important issue here is what consent actually is. Who cares whether I'm in the mood for sex or not (unless I'm actually going to tell the other person to stop). The point is that if people are going to have sex then they have to be in the mood... and it's not necessary to kill the mood with affirmative consent nonsense if the other person has already consented by not saying stop when sex has already began.

What's next? "May I keep touching your vagina? Are you having doubts about letting me touch your vagina? Do you still want me to touch your vagina? Was that facial expression doubts about me touching your vagina? What that a cue for you to not want me to touch it anymore? And by "it" I mean your vagina."

I would expect her response would most likely be something like "Well I'm certainly not in the mood now that you've said all that weird shit."

The way you're describing consent... sounds far creepier.

if having to ask get you out of the mode . Then simply don't have sex there is plenty of porn out there  . And not saying is no is not saying yes.

In answer to your question yes . As consenting to one act is not consenting to any act .

I would expect her response to be her response . It might be "No i'm not in the mood for that "No i'm not into that" "Maybe that far but no further " all response i have received because i asked first . And no i have never had a woman say "

As I understand it, affirmed consent is primarily promoted on college and university campuses, where casual hook-ups with strangers are routine/commonplace, AND where recreational alcohol/substance use, and/or binge-drinking just happen to be infused into the culture.

The notion of being required to continually interrupt sex in order to re-gain consent is a deliberate mischaracterization that's trotted by MRM activists and is eagerly accepted as the truth by those who are receptive to their message, as well as those who just don't bother to find out what it actually entails.

https://thinkprogress.org/what-affirmati...65b32b388/

Quote:Affirmative consent isn’t based on the idea that every sexual encounter is a rigid contract between two parties. No one is suggesting that college students need to run through a checklist before unbuttoning each other’s shirts. Instead, it’s more about broadly reorienting about how we approach sex in the first place.

When did this thread switch from attacking positions to attacking each other? Can’t we ever just say, “guess we’re not going to see eye to eye on this one guys; let’s walk away”, rather than devolving into twenty pages of nasty personal attacks and shit slinging?