Every assertion you make is baseless other than the fact that there are more laws nowadays. That is a direct consequence of raising awareness of rape culture (via things like the article that I linked), bringing it out into the open.
Direct consequence of raising awareness of rape culture. Thank you.
If a student of anything walked into any place of it's relevant study, they'd be laughed clean out of the room by those who have the study and the experience. They'll also tell you that experience will often times trump and even in other situations, completely negate the study the student may have thought to be 100% factual. Since we're just throwing things out there.
Awesome, thanks for dismissing both my intelligence and my training.
Um. Anecdotal evidence doesn't trump any study. I used to think you were just dumb-trolling me back, but now it's becoming more apparent that you might not understand any sort of research ever?
I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. He posted a bit of academic research. You've dismissed it as irrelevant to your specific point. He's indicated that it suggests a likely outcome, but admits that it doesn't actually study your exact point. You go on to suggest that if he, as a "student" were to show up someplace where "professionals" work, he'd be laughed out of the office.
Pot calling the kettle black much? You've been slammed with evidence/facts for years dismissing your claims and your usual response is either to disappear from the topic or type -nah- so how about that?
I did neither. I was simply stating that the comment was unneeded and could be dismissed as such if used as a stepping ground over the other person speaking.
walk it back, cussin' is fucking hilarious.
Yippie kay yay, nonconsensual motherfucker.
That joke wasn't about strength, it was about underpinning the class difference between crass New York street cop John McLaine, and the erudite and sophisticated criminal terrorist Hans Gruber (who can't even repeat the line back correctly later because of how awkward it feels coming from him).
I agree with you! I meant strength of the joke, which is based in McClane's dirty gritty don't-give-a-fuck cop.
maybe a list of posts ironically marked funny and upvoted from reddit?
Right. It was showing that McClane was mentally incapable of expressing himself without swearing. Gruber only turned toward swearing in mockery, and as he lost control of the situation, and therefore himself.
I don't need or want your help, Charlie.
at least one good thing has come of this thread, I can hearby stop my world wide search for the most boring man alive
I've always pictured Stienman as Donny Osmond in my mind. Cool in his own clean cut, family oriented sort of way.
Charlie, you seriously need better hobbies.
*lip quivers, tear rolling down cheek*
Ok, I feel like I've had to repeat this too many times.
I see rape as more of an involuntary violation than torture. Rape has always been about pecking order (as far as I can tell) and as such the people getting raped are getting "demoted" from their current place in the social hierarchy. I'm sure there are people who rape a victim because they genuinely want to have sex with that person, were turned down, and then forged ahead anyway, but I'm not sure that doesn't end up being my first point again. It's not so much that I-am-going-to-have-sex-with-you as it is that I-am-going-to-have-sex-with-you-and-you-will-be-powerless-to-stop-me.
You're drawing a causal conclusion exclusive from corollary evidence. That's the opposite of how science works. Corollary evidence is used to form hypotheses which are then tested using experimentation. The article I linked was an experimental study, not a purely theoretical study.
I believe you missed the entire paragraph in parenthesis.
Rape was even more minimized in the past, so your point is beyond absurd.
How can it have been minimized if it was hidden from view almost completely? It was a very serious issue, so serious it couldn't even be allowed to be heard most of the time. I don't see the absurdity. It was something that wasn't even spoken by nearly any victim decades ago. Now it's out in the open, and even joked about.
I simply disagree with that. They would treat it as if it were nothing, vs something you couldn't and would be allowed to speak about because of the severity.
That's not what I wrote at all: I said they hid it because it was too severe to acknowledge in it's time BECAUSE it wasn't something minimal as you claim it was. It was hid because of it's severity not because it was simply ignored.
[DOUBLEPOST=1364247103][/DOUBLEPOST]( 
)
