PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
"as real women" what?.....
Colorado woman faces no jail time for statutory rape, pregnancy by 13-year-old boy
- Thread starter ExpressLane
- Start date
"as real women" what?.....
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I think I've been handling it well for the last 71 years.......I can probably make it to the end......
I'd bet a year's salary. If you can remember what that means. Thank you for so poignantly demonstrating your absolute lack of compensation of woke by mentioning Hannity.
Force is not required for rape. Fuck, man, did you just fall off the stupid truck?
Yes it is. That is the distinction.
What's up with the insults? You've always been nice and polite. What happened?
NiftyNiblick
1960s Chick Magnet
Hannity? I mentioned 'humanity." Jesus Christ on a flat-tired unicycle!
The Sage of Main Street
Verified User
Heterophobia, a Symptom of Being Afraid to Grow Up
No, it isn't. That is not the distinction. I can only post the definition of the word for you. I can't make you comprehend it.
My mistake. I read that post too quickly. In any event, woke is not a devolution. It's humanity progressing. You'll notice that only anciently old people like you and other hatefully bigoted people bitch about wokeness.
Do you remember which dictionary?
I'm glad that you liked what I said
. However, it seems you didn't fully absorb what I meant. I suspect you saw something in my post that you strongly agree with but also missed part of what I said as well.Before getting into that, though, let me explain why I've been silent ever since post #143 2 days ago: I wanted to at least skim every single post and catalogue it into a thread tree before posting again. I've been fairly busy in the last 2 days and this thread has also been pretty busy, which has meant that it was all I could do just to try to keep up with cataloguing the posts here. I'm happy to say I finally finished cataloguing them all.
So, back to the dual subjects brought up in my first paragraph. The part I don't think you absorbed is that I literally contradicted you when I said that unlike what you've been saying, statutory rape is a -form- of rape.
So that's the mistake I think that you've been consistently making- to try to separate statutory rape as something that is separate from rape when it is in fact one of the forms of rape both in law and in dictionaries.
Now for something that I think your detractors have consistently ignored- that not all types of rapes are alike and that that statutory rape is a form of rape where the alleged harm to the minor can sometimes be hotly debated. You recognized this when you referred to what I believe was the case of Mary Kay Letourneau and Fualaau, which I brought up in post #40, which also happens to be the very first post that I made in this thread. In the very same post, I also brought up an anonymous story of a male who talked of being sexually abused by adult women in his second year of kindergarten. While he doesn't specify, my guess is that he did -not- consent to whatever it was that the women he referred to did with him. Consent certainly isn't everything when it comes to people's experiences of a sexual interaction, but I think it's the most important thing, regardless of whether or not they are legally allowed to consent.
In summation, not all rapes are alike, and I remember a post (can't remember the number) where you specifically asked Diesel if he felt the Colorado woman from whom this thread gets its name should get 20 years to life for having unlawful sex with a teen boy. I remember Diesel's response as well, that she should get whatever the law states she should get. I suspect that when you asked Diesel directly whether this woman should be judged by the same light as someone who forcibly raped someone, he took a step back, because deep down, he knows there is, in fact, a difference between a minor who apparently consented to have sex with an adult and may have thoroughly enjoyed the experience(s) and someone forcibly raping someone else.
With that, I'll end this post with a music video that came out 20 years ago. Still brings up a lot of points that I think some tend to ignore...
Last edited:
It is one of the most conservative parts of the country. The area had not voted for a Democratic President since 1964, and has only twice voted for a Democrat in the last 100 years.
The future for this child is very grim. There is actual caselaw pushed by Republicans that allow the kid to be sued for child support. The fact the child was the product of statutory rape no longer matters in red states.
I comprehend it just fine.
“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape
I'm glad that you liked what I said
Before getting into that, though, let me explain why I've been silent ever since post #143 2 days ago: I wanted to at least skim every single post and catalogue it into a thread tree before posting again. I've been fairly busy in the last 2 days and this thread has also been pretty busy, which has meant that it was all I could do just to try to keep up with cataloguing the posts here. I'm happy to say I finally finished cataloguing them all.
So, back to the dual subjects brought up in my first paragraph. The part I don't think you absorbed is that I literally contradicted you when I said that unlike what you've been saying, statutory rape is a -form- of rape.
So that's the mistake I think that you've been consistently making- to try to separate statutory rape as something that is separate from rape when it is in fact one of the forms of rape both in law and in dictionaries.
Now for something that I think your detractors have consistently ignored- that not all types of rapes are alike and that that statutory rape is a form of rape where the alleged harm to the minor can sometimes be hotly debated. You recognized this when you referred to what I believe was the case of Mary Kay Letourneau and Fualaau, which I brought up in post #40, which also happens to be the very first post that I made in this thread. In the very same post, I also brought up an anonymous story of a male who talked of being sexually abused by adult women in his second year of kindergarten. While he doesn't specify, my guess is that he did -not- consent to whatever it was that the women he referred to did with him. Consent certainly isn't everything when it comes to people's experiences of a sexual interaction, but I think it's the most important thing, regardless of whether or not they are legally allowed to consent.
In summation, not all rapes are alike, and I remember a post (can't remember the number) where you specifically asked Diesel if he felt the Colorado woman from whom this thread gets its name should get 20 years to life for having unlawful sex with a teen boy. I remember Diesel's response as well, that she should get whatever the law states she should get. I suspect that when you asked Diesel directly whether this woman should be judged by the same light as someone who forcibly raped someone, he took a step back, because deep down, he knows there is, in fact, a difference b etween a minor who apparently consented to have sex with an adult and may have thoroughly enjoyed the experience(s) and someone forcibly raping someone else.
With that, I'll end this post with a music video that came out 20 years ago. Still brings up a lot of points that I think some tend to ignore...
Yeah I understand. According to the law, statutory rape is a form of rape. Rape can be considered as a thief of innocence.
My point really is that how is it possible for this woman to "rape" the boy if she doesn't even have a penis? LOL.
But we all can agree that this can be constructed as a thief of innocence and trust.
If you did, you wouldn't continue to insist that rape isn't rape.
See my post right above yours.