How the fuck is there a statute of limitations for rape in New York?

[Faith No More]

what always happens.. I take a hard stance against what people seem to think is way out there, we go back and fourth. the smart one's get what I am saying and drop out first, then the friends of the smart ones, then once things kind get explain away, some real/middle of the road people come out say or ask what is on their mind, then not so smart ones argue their "figurens" and can't get past something trivial, then the name calling, once they run out of stuff.. i am still stuck explaining level one definitions ad nausium to faith no more, till someone like you wants a recap of a weeks worth of dialog.

What are you talking about? I haven't replied to you in this thread for nearly forty pages, because I am one of the smart ones. We drop out because talking to you is like arguing with the world's dumbest brick wall. But hey, continue to think that everything that happens here is because of how awesome you are. I'm still trying to decide which is greater, your stupidity or your ego.

And I'm out again, because I may as well be talking to a bag of dicks...

[FatAndFaithless]

Wait what? If there is consent, the sex is not forced. You can't force someone to do something they're already doing willingly that makes no sense.

Consent and force are not exclusive in that context, they can actually go hand in hand. You consent to it before the actual act takes place, but then you get in character and you don't. You resist and the other party resorts to force. That's the whole point of it and is what Drich is talking about, I believe. Everyone is purposefully misunderstanding him. I wonder if it has anything to do with him being a theist.

Drich is not talking about a fetish play/fantasy.  Seriously EP, it's like you're ignoring the entirety of the thread before you entered it.

Drich is not talking about fetish play/fantasy.

All he has to do is say "I'm talking about this in the context of a fetish or roleplay instance." Then wham bam problem solved. But he's not.

[Drich]

By simple definition, sex that is forced is non-consensual.

This, right here.

says who? white people? what of the non white people living here?

[Excited Penguin]

Again you are not allowing for a cultural divide when you say all forced sex must be against the will.

Forced sex or rough sex Many would argue is apart of a mating dance some cultures take part in. It can be brutal and physically indistinguishable from a rape, but isn't a rape because both side consent to the roles they play.

Which is what makes consent the key to separate forced sex from rape.

If you don't agree then what allowance/how do you explain the sexual culture  that I am explaining?

When there is consent involved, it isn't forced. Rough, yes. Forced, no. 

Again, this just seems like a counterproductive play on words.

It's not just "rough", though, the other person has to actually resist in the name of the fantasy, so forced is actually a better way of describing it.

[Catholic_Lady]

The difference though is that killing isn't always immoral. If you kill someone out of self defense, that's not immoral. If you kill someone by a freak accident that wasn't your fault, that's not immoral. Forced sex, on the other hand, is ALWAYS immoral. 

...That's why people are freaking out over what you are saying. You're making it sound like you don't think forced sex is always immoral and always horrible.

Like I said to other's. 60% of the world population is asian. Traditionally speaking a Wife/Mother is not supposed to enjoy sex. It is considered dishonorable to want to have sex if one is not a "pleasure girl"/whore. To have sex outside a plan to have a child often involves consensual 'cohersive' behavior/forced sex.

 In this 'game' it is a man's responsibility to be so good at what he does, that he incites so much passion in the woman she is overcome with it, to the detriment of her position/title, social obligations and honor. Most of the time (physical evidence wise) there is no difference between forced sex and rape. as cuts, bruises and blood are the semi norm.

The only difference is consent.

With consent forced sex is how most asian people are here, and who are any of us to say that is wrong.

Without consent it is wrong, and should be dealt with as far as the law will allow.

Ok then. I guess we are using a different understanding of the definition of the word "forced." The way I define the word forced, is that there is no consent involved. It seems you have a very different definition for it.

[LadyForCamus]

Forced= physical resistance.

Which CAN be apart of a mating dance/game.

Again consent being the only measure of rape.

Keep it clean chicken man.

This isn't actually true. Feigning resistance isn't the same as actually resisting. If there is consent the sex is not forced no matter what the game. I don't know why the fuck you're bringing sex games into this. Seems like a desperate attempt to get people to forget that you said rape is legally defined as "unlawful sexual activity" which is of course horse shit.

I don't understand why he is having such a hard time with this... Oh, yeah. He's pretending to be "confused" on purpose. Conflation is the only mechanism by which Drich can arrive at his point...whatever it is.

[FatAndFaithless]

When there is consent involved, it isn't forced. Rough, yes. Forced, no. 

Again, this just seems like a counterproductive play on words.

It's not just "rough", though, the other person has to actually resist in the name of the fantasy, so forced is actually a better way of describing it.

How many times are you going to repeat this before you realize that a 'fantasy' is not what's being discussed here?

[Losty]

There are ways to have consensual "forced" sex. It's all about what the couple agrees to beforehand. That's not to say it ever needs to become more than roleplay, or that an actual rape will occur. It requires trust from both parties and an adequate read of what the other person wants, in addition to actual words describing what they want. Then it's all about the fantasy of it.

If it's just a fantasy and you need to put the word forced in "quotations" then it is not forced sex. It's all an act. It may be a very elaborate and convincing act but it's still an act. The second the person pretending to resist changes their mind and begins resisting for real the consent is lost and the act, if continued, becomes rape. You cannot have consensual forced sex. You can only have consensual sex where both parties agree to pretend the sex is forced.

[Catholic_Lady]

EXACTLY

I am simply providing a narritive of forced sex Not being an example of rape.

The Difference between rape and forced sex is consent.

The asian women who Consent to forced sex EVEN HERE IN THE US, are not being raped even though they may endure a similar physical act. Which is how the law applies.

I said that to refute the idea there forced sex is always rape/ There can not be an example of forced sex without it being considered rape.

Go back a few pages and look at all the self righteous condemnation you were just apart of or have you already forgotten?

Wait what? If there is consent, the sex is not forced. You can't force someone to do something they're already doing willingly that makes no sense.

He's defining the word "forced" differently.

[Joods]

If sex is forced, then lack of consent is implied.  Otherwise it wouldn't be forced.

Rough sex =/= forced sex.

And if you think I'm into 'normal' sex, then hoo boy.

Forced= physical resistance.

Which CAN be apart of a mating dance/game.

Again consent being the only measure of rape.

Keep it clean chicken man.

If you have to use "force" as part of a mating dance/game, as you put it, then you're doing it wrong and the other person clearly doesn't want to be with you if you have to force yourself on her. If she wants you bad enough, you don't have to force a thing.

Let's look at what Alabama has to say about how consent is defined:
Alabama^

• How is Consent Defined?
  Consent has been interpreted to mean “acquiescence or compliance with the proposition of another.” Ex parte Gordon, 706 So. 2d 1160, 1162 (Ala. 1997).
  Lack of consent results from:
  
  1. forcible compulsion;
     
  2. incapacity to consent; or
     
  3. if the offense charged is sexual abuse, any circumstances, in addition to forcible compulsion or incapacity to consent, in which the victim does not expressly or impliedly acquiesce in the actor’s conduct. Ala. Code § 13A-6-70(b).
     
• “Forcible compulsion” means physical force that overcomes earnest resistance or a threat, express or implied, that places a person in fear of immediate death or serious physical injury to himself or another person. Ala. Code § 13A-6-60(8)
  

emphasis in red, mine
See that Drippy? Look closely, under How is Consent Defined? It tells you right there: acquiescence or compliance with the proposition of another.

Lack of consent results from...

Oh hey... the very first one listed is: Forcible compulsion. And further down, it gives you the legal definition for Forcible compulsion as defined by the state of Alabama with regards to consent. So yeah, if you have to force yourself on another, you didn't get their consent to do whatever it is you wanted to do to them.

So tell us all how there's such a thing as forced consent, because I have time... I can go to the other 49 states links to see what they have to say about it. And I'm pretty sure there's going to be consistencies between state laws.