Why I will never, Enn Eee Vee NEVER legally marry an American woman - particularly if I then reside within Feminist Federal jurisdiction. “With this grenade pin I thee wed…” No thank 'ee.
As usual, underneath all the people shouting at each other are a couple of sensible third way things which never get out from under the extreme positions
( ... )
This makes it harder for them to explicitly revoke consent. Not sure what the answer is here…
For the guy to know what to look for and to pay attention. My wife and I were the products of that earlier culture, where indeed the female psychology of “go along to get along” was reinforced. She was also raised with the idea that a wife is called by Nature and Nature's God to submit to her husband. Obviously this is a recipe for truly bad abuse. It didn't happen, because my own duty as her husband was to cherish and care for her and I certainly would never knowingly hurt her! So yes, when I wanted to fool around I didn't bother to get consent (must it be in writing?) but if she wasn't responsive I STOPPED. She didn't need to “buck the current” and muster the courage to tell a man No; if I wasn't getting Yes, that answered the question! This was meant for her benefit too, after all, and for me that was more than half the fun…
I gather that this is somewhat unusual nowadays, but it wasn't in our time.
I don't think it's any more or less usual "nowadays" than "on any days." I think the overwhelming majority of men have brains in their heads and think the way you do. Some don't. Some have always not. It's just that this unfortunately needs to be spelled out to those who don't get it.
1) The burden of proof is *always* on the victim, in literally every crime on the books. Murder cannot be prosecuted lacking a corpse, assault cannot be prosecuted without determining who threw the first punch. The burden of proof in criminal prosecutions is literally always "beyond a reasonable doubt". Tell me, why should This particular crime be changed to "guilty until proven innocent?" Why should the entire concept of western criminal prosecution be changed to "better to incarcerate 100 innocent men than have 1 rapist go free
( ... )
This is a sad byproduct of our screw around culture. Guys need to be really, really careful who they stick it in because nowadays a woman can ruin someones life with no evidence. How does one withdraw consent months later? At least the victim of mattress girl is suing the university and might get some justice.
Consent can no more be retroactively revoked than one can unsee something. Consent is a decision, it's a decision you make at the time. In retrospect I would not have consented to marry my ex-husband, but I did marry him, with all the consequences that entailed. If anyone thinks you can go back in time and reverse history for any reason and under any circumstance, there's something wrong with their thinking.
Marriage is no more consent to sex at every possible moment your partner wants it than buying a house obligates you to stay in that house 24/7 for as long as you own it.
I have no idea what your PS is referring to, can you elaborate?
I would be inclined to agree that nothing is retroactively alterable. However, that's *not* good enough for the social justice warrior. Mattress girl (Who, was invited to stand next to the first lady of the United States during a State Of The Union address, A place reserved for true heroes, we're not talking about some fringe outlier here) for instance, continued pursuing a relationship with her "attacker" for literally six months after the event, and only started pursuing grievances when it became clear that he wasn't interested in a relationship. What would you define as "retroactive revocation of consent" if that doesn't meet the definition
( ... )
Comments 9
Why I will never, Enn Eee Vee NEVER legally marry an American woman - particularly if I then reside within Feminist Federal jurisdiction. “With this grenade pin I thee wed…” No thank 'ee.
Reply
Reply
This makes it harder for them to explicitly revoke consent. Not sure what the answer is here…
For the guy to know what to look for and to pay attention. My wife and I were the products of that earlier culture, where indeed the female psychology of “go along to get along” was reinforced. She was also raised with the idea that a wife is called by Nature and Nature's God to submit to her husband. Obviously this is a recipe for truly bad abuse. It didn't happen, because my own duty as her husband was to cherish and care for her and I certainly would never knowingly hurt her! So yes, when I wanted to fool around I didn't bother to get consent (must it be in writing?) but if she wasn't responsive I STOPPED. She didn't need to “buck the current” and muster the courage to tell a man No; if I wasn't getting Yes, that answered the question! This was meant for her benefit too, after all, and for me that was more than half the fun…
I gather that this is somewhat unusual nowadays, but it wasn't in our time.
Reply
Reply
Reply
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/columbia-student-defamed-by-mattress-girl-is-suing/article/2563566?utm_content=buffer5ce56&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Reply
Marriage is no more consent to sex at every possible moment your partner wants it than buying a house obligates you to stay in that house 24/7 for as long as you own it.
I have no idea what your PS is referring to, can you elaborate?
Reply
Reply
words mean things, and lives are on the line
Quite true, and thus my own words:
« Идите на восток, молодой человек!»
… Think of it as Evolution in Action.
Reply
Leave a comment