Hilarious! Trump having problems finding artists.

[Thumpalumpacus]

When faced with the choice between appealing to semantics to rescue an argument and changing one's mind about the matter, the latter is the advisable course, in almost every case I can imagine.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

The whole point of this, which you seem intent on obfuscating, is that the definition of penetration in the Texas penal code is completely relevant to this conversation and cannot be dismissed by you.

Texas don't even mention the word rape in their penal code, so I'm not sure how anyone can be convicted of rape, people will generally be convicted for sexual assault.

The links you have posted mostly define rape as forced penetration. I'm not going to look into all of the 50 state's specific laws word by word, the general definition is forced penetration, which a woman can't do unless she's using a foreign object which would then not qualify as rape.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The prosecution may not be filing the charge as "rape" due to the verbiage of the law, but the act of rape is most certainly prosecuted here in Texas.

I have to assume you're being willfully obtuse. There's no way you can be so unintelligent as to not see the point made.

Again, when your only defense is semantics, you're probably fighting for an indefensible premise.

[SteelCurtain]

The whole point of this, which you seem intent on obfuscating, is that the definition of penetration in the Texas penal code is completely relevant to this conversation and cannot be dismissed by you.

Texas don't even mention the word rape in their penal code, so I'm not sure how anyone can be convicted of rape, people will generally be convicted for sexual assault.

The links you have posted mostly define rape as forced penetration. I'm not going to look into all of the 50 state's specific laws word by word, the general definition is forced penetration, which a woman can't do unless she's using a foreign object which would then not qualify as rape.

Yep, now you're just trolling. Great job at having an adult conversation.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

The prosecution may not be filing the charge as "rape" due to the verbiage of the law, but the act of rape is most certainly prosecuted here in Texas.

I have to assume you're being willfully obtuse. There's no way you can be so unintelligent as to not see the point made.

Again, when your only defense is semantics, you're probably fighting for an indefensible premise.

Getting convicted for rape is far more damaging that say for sexual assault. Just the allegation of a rape can ruin future career prospects, nobody wants to hire someone like that. You didn't read news about that football team that got falsely accused of rape, then had the rape claim proved false and then still had their lives ruined? Half the punishment is the label of a "rapist" itself. No idea why you're defending not naming a female rapist a rapist.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The prosecution may not be filing the charge as "rape" due to the verbiage of the law, but the act of rape is most certainly prosecuted here in Texas.

I have to assume you're being willfully obtuse. There's no way you can be so unintelligent as to not see the point made.

Again, when your only defense is semantics, you're probably fighting for an indefensible premise.

Getting convicted for rape is far more damaging that say for sexual assault. Just the allegation of a rape can ruin future career prospects, nobody wants to hire someone like that. You didn't read news about that football team that got falsely accused of rape, then had the rape claim proved false and then still had their lives ruined? Half the punishment is the label of a "rapist" itself. No idea why you're defending not naming a female rapist a rapist.

No, in Texas aggravated sexual assault is the same career-killer as rape elsewhere.

Why you think I'm defending anything is beyond me, because I'm not. I'm pointing out, as a citizen of Texas, that you're simply wrong. I'm also pointing out that your appeal to semantics is silly.

Bottom line: You're spouting off even though you don't have a clue what you're talking about, and are so wedded to your own views that you're unwilling to consider that you might be wrong.

Truly is it said, "Certainty is the surest impediment to learning."

[Tiberius]

When a woman rape someone she should get charged with rape. Period.

It should be noted that this type of behavior on the part of women is extremely rare.

Define "extremely rare", because according to a survey conducted by "Greenberg, Bruess and Haffner" (I can find numerous references to this survey but not the actual survey itself), 6.3% of rapists are female.

6.3% doesn't strike me as "extremely rare". Its basically 1 out of every 16 rapists.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I'm pretty sure it's way more than that. Just the reaction of the public is heartbreaking. People laugh at a man sharing his experience of abuse from a woman. Imagine that. There's actually a video about this on YouTube where a man shares how he was beaten by his girlfriend and locked inside a room and you could hear the whole audience laugh their ass off as if they were on a Jimmy Fallon show. It's truly heartbreaking.

A man that's been raped is looked at with disgust of how weak he must be. Many men doesn't even report these incidents out of fear of ridicule. When they share a rape incident with their friends their friends either congratulate him on getting raped or ridicule him by questioning his sexuality.

These kinds of things don't normally happen where I live, I could honestly not give a shit about some rando I'll probably never even meet in my life but once you read stories of these men that after getting raped actually got laughed at, its heartbreaking that you can't help but speak up for them.

It just seems outright impossible to even imagine a woman actually getting laughed at for getting raped or have her sexuality questioned. Men deserve the same compassion.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It just seems outright impossible to even imagine a woman actually getting laughed at for getting raped or have her sexuality questioned. Men deserve the same compassion.

What happens with women is no less heartbreaking, kid. They get put up on the stand and asked to revisit the sordid details of their violation ... in a sense, asked to relive the experience. Just so we're clear, I'm not advocating shaming male rape victims. But your fixation on what is a much rarer occurrence bespeaks an agenda in play, it seems to me. You come from a legal system which only allows that men commit rape, denies that marital rape is a crime, and defines rape in terms of penetration, and then you are alleging that that is the case elsewhere when in fact it isn't, as you've already been shown. Perhaps you're uncomfortable with the legal redress we in the West provide women who have been violated. Why might that be? Are you perhaps importing your own cultural mores with you? Here, let's look at some facts.

Excluding definitions, here's the body of code governing Texas prosecutions of sexual assault:

Sec. 22.011.  SEXUAL ASSAULT.  (a)  A person commits an offense if the person:
(1)  intentionally or knowingly:
(A)  causes the penetration of the anus or sexual organ of another person by any means, without that person's consent;
(B)  causes the penetration of the mouth of another person by the sexual organ of the actor, without that person's consent;  or
©  causes the sexual organ of another person, without that person's consent, to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor;  or
(2)  intentionally or knowingly:
(A)  causes the penetration of the anus or sexual organ of a child by any means;
(B)  causes the penetration of the mouth of a child by the sexual organ of the actor;
©  causes the sexual organ of a child to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor;
(D)  causes the anus of a child to contact the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor;  or
(E)  causes the mouth of a child to contact the anus or sexual organ of another person, including the actor.
(b)  A sexual assault under Subsection (a)(1) is without the consent of the other person if:
(1)  the actor compels the other person to submit or participate by the use of physical force or violence;
(2)  the actor compels the other person to submit or participate by threatening to use force or violence against the other person, and the other person believes that the actor has the present ability to execute the threat;
(3)  the other person has not consented and the actor knows the other person is unconscious or physically unable to resist;
(4)  the actor knows that as a result of mental disease or defect the other person is at the time of the sexual assault incapable either of appraising the nature of the act or of resisting it;
(5)  the other person has not consented and the actor knows the other person is unaware that the sexual assault is occurring;
(6)  the actor has intentionally impaired the other person's power to appraise or control the other person's conduct by administering any substance without the other person's knowledge;
(7)  the actor compels the other person to submit or participate by threatening to use force or violence against any person, and the other person believes that the actor has the ability to execute the threat;
(8)  the actor is a public servant who coerces the other person to submit or participate;
(9)  the actor is a mental health services provider or a health care services provider who causes the other person, who is a patient or former patient of the actor, to submit or participate by exploiting the other person's emotional dependency on the actor;
(10)  the actor is a clergyman who causes the other person to submit or participate by exploiting the other person's emotional dependency on the clergyman in the clergyman's professional character as spiritual adviser;  or
(11)  the actor is an employee of a facility where the other person is a resident, unless the employee and resident are formally or informally married to each other under Chapter 2, Family Code.

And here's the code for aggravated sexual assault:

Sec. 22.021.  AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT.  (a)  A person commits an offense:
(1)  if the person:
(A)  intentionally or knowingly:
(i)  causes the penetration of the anus or sexual organ of another person by any means, without that person's consent;
(ii)  causes the penetration of the mouth of another person by the sexual organ of the actor, without that person's consent; or
(iii)  causes the sexual organ of another person, without that person's consent, to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor; or
(B)  intentionally or knowingly:
(i)  causes the penetration of the anus or sexual organ of a child by any means;
(ii)  causes the penetration of the mouth of a child by the sexual organ of the actor;
(iii)  causes the sexual organ of a child to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor;
(iv)  causes the anus of a child to contact the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor; or
(v)  causes the mouth of a child to contact the anus or sexual organ of another person, including the actor; and
(2)  if:
(A)  the person:
(i)  causes serious bodily injury or attempts to cause the death of the victim or another person in the course of the same criminal episode;
(ii)  by acts or words places the victim in fear that any person will become the victim of an offense under Section 20A.02(a)(3), (4), (7), or (8) or that death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping will be imminently inflicted on any person;
(iii)  by acts or words occurring in the presence of the victim threatens to cause any person to become the victim of an offense under Section 20A.02(a)(3), (4), (7), or (8) or to cause the death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping of any person;
(iv)  uses or exhibits a deadly weapon in the course of the same criminal episode;
(v)  acts in concert with another who engages in conduct described by Subdivision (1) directed toward the same victim and occurring during the course of the same criminal episode; or
(vi)  administers or provides flunitrazepam, otherwise known as rohypnol, gamma hydroxybutyrate, or ketamine to the victim of the offense with the intent of facilitating the commission of the offense;
(B)  the victim is younger than 14 years of age; or
©  the victim is an elderly individual or a disabled individual.

Source for both quotes: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Do.../PE.22.htm

Now tell us -- don't these things sound like "rape" to you, even if that word you're fixated upon doesn't appear in the text? You'll notice that the language is gender- and violator-neutral. Under this code, a woman can be and has been prosecuted for causing her sexual organs to contact a man's sexual organs against his will.  

This is stark contrast to the law in your native land:

§375. Rape. A man is said to commit "rape" who, except case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse[15] with a woman in circumstances falling under any of the six following descriptions:-
Firstly. –– Against her will.
Secondly. –– Without her consent.
Thirdly. –– With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested, in fear of death or of hurt.
Fourthly. –– With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.
Fifthly. –– With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
Sixthly. –– With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen[16] years of age.
Explanation. –– Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape.
Exception. –– Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape.

It seems to me like your problem is with the laws of your own country, because clearly those are the ones which suffer the deficiencies that has your butthurt so riled. Clearly, as shown above, even this backwards state of Texas has laws which far surpass those of your own home country in terms of the equal treatment of genders.

Looks to me like you'd better zero your rifle in better, kid ... you're hitting Maggie's Drawers on this one.

[Jehanne]

It should be noted that this type of behavior on the part of women is extremely rare.

Define "extremely rare", because according to a survey conducted by "Greenberg, Bruess and Haffner" (I can find numerous references to this survey but not the actual survey itself), 6.3% of rapists are female.

6.3% doesn't strike me as "extremely rare". Its basically 1 out of every 16 rapists.

Mark Twain quipped that, "There are lies, damned lies, and then there's statistics".

It's just one survey, and I really doubt that it is accurate.  I suppose that we can talk about forcible rape, but better yet, let the FBI answer the question for us; I am sure that there are statistics from the DoJ on this.