Atheism +

[thesummerqueen]

Third. I had to try to pinpoint when, exactly, I knew I was falling in love with my boyfriend. I had to think a little and I realized it was when we went on a museum date. We went to the natural history museum and he was getting really excited and 'geeking out' at all the exhibits there. I thought it was super cute and it's what really got the feelings started for him.

This - I fell for my boyfriend when he was taking a photo of me. He does it for a living, and is great at it, but what got me was that I wasn't even "there" - he was concentrating on a craft he really enjoys and his face was far away and rapt when it came out from behind the camera to direct me what to do. He got that same look when he hit on spots in the city that he was seeing anew (we were showing a Charlotte newbie around uptown). He's not classically handsome, but when he gets that look - when he's seen something he wants to capture or when he's geeking over transhumanism or computer stuff - I just want to eat him up.

[The Grand Nudger]

Not tricky at all. If neither can remember at all, there is no way to tell whether either party is guilty of rape or not. In a court of law you must prove beyond reasonable doubt that a rape occurred. It is surely upsetting for the victim when this cannot happen and a guilty rapist is allowed free, but I'd rather that happen than an innocent person be found guilty. Always.

In a court of law you must curry the favor and sympathy of the jury. "Guilty rapists" are "set free" Tibs? "I can't remember" doesn't, to my mind, look to be a very effective defense. I agree that it would be difficult to imagine a way to proceed with such a case as either the prosecution or the defense, if I'd put all of my chips in with a persons personal testimony as to whether or not they remember the night in question.

(I think you'd make a great judge btw Tibs...but probably a shitty lawyer.....glowing praise in some circles..lol)

[Autumnlicious]

Lawyers frequently misrepresent to gain favor and leeway. Something as simple as not disclosing something because the other side was stupid and didn't do discovery is quite common.

A judge's duty is to weigh the facts of the case.

Tiberius is arguing that if there is no other evidence than the dubious word on the part of the drunken party (no bruises, witness statements, signs of forcible rape), then it cannot be called rape beyond a shadow of a doubt, of which our legal system is supposed to weigh upon.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

Atheism + is short for "Atheism plus periods" right? That what it seems like anyway.

[The Grand Nudger]

Lawyers frequently misrepresent to gain favor and leeway. Something as simple as not disclosing something because the other side was stupid and didn't do discovery is quite common.

A judge's duty is to weigh the facts of the case.

Tiberius is arguing that if there is no other evidence than the dubious word on the part of the drunken party (no bruises, witness statements, signs of forcible rape), then it cannot be called rape beyond a shadow of a doubt, of which our legal system is supposed to weigh upon.

The tricky bit isn't how our laws are supposed to work (in principle, I think we could all point to cases where some legal decision mystifies us given our understanding of the principles behind it), given the most neutral of scenarios, but how they do work (in practice, and again, mystifying bits of legal theater abound). In this scenario there is clear evidence of intercourse, neither side is contesting this, neither side can remember the specifics but for some reason or another (imagine whatever you like) one party felt that pressing charges was the way to move forward. "Too drunk to remember whether I committed a crime" doesn't cut it as a defense, as far as I'm aware. "Too drunk to give consent" does- as an argument for the prosecution.
(depending on the jurisdictions definition of rape, obviously)

[TaraJo]

I also think it would be interesting to look at society's view of statutory rape in regards to sexism. When an older man has sex with a teen age girl, say 15 or 16, how does the world see it? He's a monster who manipulated that poor girl for his own selfish, deviant sexual urges. What about those women (and there have been quite a few over the past decade or so) who has sex with a 15 or 16 year old boy? We all tell him how lucky he is and what a stud he is. Seriously. Can you imagine the outcry if a woman was raped and we tell her she should just enjoy it or we tell other women they should be jealous?

This reminds me of the ex-cheerleader turned high school teacher that slept with one of her students. As a reward for pleading guilty she had all felony charges dropped against her which meant she would spend no time in prison. All I could think of when I saw this on the news was the outcry there would be if a man who fucked one of his underage students was allowed to go free.

If you think that's bad, read this story and then read some of the comments.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...iagra.html

I've heard the story might not be true, but that's not really the point. A robber, male, broke in and was promptly attacked, tied up, drugged with viagra and raped for three days. Yet, the comments, those are all telling him what a stud he is. If a woman was beaten, tied up, drugged and raped for three days, would anyone be telling her what a stud she is? Would anyone claim to be jealous of her?

[Creed of Heresy]

Tara: Yeah, it's kind of hard to chivalrous and not a chauvinist with stories like that.

I have to admit, my slowly-building chauvinism tends to come more from the endless barrage of double-standards women throw all over the place. "We want a nice guy, where are the nice guys, waaaaah!" They're friendzoned, you bitch. "Why are guys such jerks, I hate jerks, they treat me so bad- OOOH, you're cute, and hard-to-get? Who cares if you cheat on me with other girls while lying through clenched teeth you love me, your personality is HOT <3 " ...Yeah, speaks for itself.

Not all women are this way. Plenty get how much bullshit so many of their fellow women throw up. Hence why I'm not a total chauvinist but all the same, it's very hard to support the women's rights crowd when in all truth I don't see women suffering anymore and instead I see them getting more advantages than I can get these days. Fuck, I applied for a job at a pet store a few weeks ago, they had ten openings. I go to this pet store all the time. I converse with the staff all the time. I was told by a manager that I had not been selected since there were more-qualified applicants chosen. I go in, find that almost every single new face in there is a very, very attractive young female, and upon talking with a few of them I find out most of them have less than a year of experience in retail; I have five years experience. Gee, I wonder why they were hired, then.

Like I've said before. Women bitching and whining saying women have it harder can go choke on a dick. Preferably mine. Because I've seriously had enough. Suffrage happened 60 years ago. They can vote, they have equal wages-per-experience as men, they have equal say, and they have fair representation in media and yet they keep bitching and wanting more. No. You don't get any more. You want equality? You have it. Stop wanting to be "more equal" than men just because women in the past were oppressed; you weren't in the past, and I don't say black people should have any more equality than white people just because of slavery; what has been done has been done and has passed, society stands in correction, and the errors of the past are acknowledged and laid bare. That's all you get, welcome to life, shut the fuck up and quit coveting thy genderal-opposite's Everything.

*deep breath*

I just had to get that off my chest. I woke up in a grouchy mood today.

[thesummerqueen]

Well, actually it's not quite equal yet. It's just not as unequal as these crazy A+'s keep saying it is, and it IS equal enough that we should be moving forward with a more egalitarian, positive standpoint.

Especially, as Dawkins tried to point out to Watson, because it's so much worse around the rest of the world.

[TaraJo]

Yet another commonality between Atheism+ and religion: they each have their own holy texts which are generally absurd but the questioning of which is heresy and extremely offensive. As an example, I give you Schrodinger's Rapist:

http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-...ing-maced/

Excuse me while I go vomit.

[thesummerqueen]

hahaha, that's what got posted on FB that sparked my little rant.