The Random Crap Thread 2: It Hits the Fan.
- Thread starter North_Ranger
- Start date
I really hope I just forgot where I put that Septa token, and didn't throw it in the recycling with that bottle cap.
Edit: Misplaced it, yes I checked, Septa tokens are expensive.
Edit: Misplaced it, yes I checked, Septa tokens are expensive.
Last edited:
Those still exist?
So, just read up on that Voosh guy. Obviously he's moronic, but, like those advocating the "return of the woman to their rightful place, in the kitchen", his plan would work. In a Taliban-IS-fascist way, obviously, by pretty much eliminating freedom for half the population, but rape would decline if women weren't allowed to go out without a chaperon. Some kinds of rape, anyway.
That said, is it wrong I hope he gets arrested for something, just for a few weeks, and gets raped in prison? Not in the sense that I actively wish him harm, but that I'd hope he'd get another perspective? Ugh.
That said, is it wrong I hope he gets arrested for something, just for a few weeks, and gets raped in prison? Not in the sense that I actively wish him harm, but that I'd hope he'd get another perspective? Ugh.
Considering the majority of rapes are performed by someone the victim knows, probably a much smaller amount of rapes than you'd think. (Not that I think you're advocating his theory, just clarifying the "rape usually happens when a woman is alone and grabbed" over-used statement.)
I'm well aware. Of course, in his theory, I'd imagine in-relationship rape doesn't exist anyway, which slices the amount of rape in half right away.
Look in any low income or largely immigrant/illegal immigrant communities. You will find video stores because...
- Many modern international releases from outside the US aren't available easily online without pirating.
- Foreign TV shows almost NEVER get released on DVD in the US.
- Many don't get a digital release even if they DO see International Release.
- Video stores can cater to local tastes more easily and quickly than Netflix can.- Many immigrants keep DVD players to play discs from home.
Basically, as long as Mexican women want to catch up on Telenovellas not shown in the US, Indians want to catch the latest big release from Bollywood, and Asian communities want to see their favorite historical dramas, the Video store will exist. Really, it's the best reason to GO these days... I love Japanese horror movies and Family Video gets them all the time, along with releases from China, South Korea, India, Russia, Europe... they damn well know what people in their communities are renting and they keep that stuff in stock.
GasBandit
Staff member
Oh his theory goes even beyond that - not only is spousal rape not a thing, but being on private property constitutes de facto legal consent for any who care to take her. The idea being, it would force the woman to "protect herself like she would protect her smartphone or purse," and that it would mean women would no longer go unchaperoned or get drunk, so that they can't get in a position where they can't protect themselves from someone who wants to (legally) force sex on her.
...'Cuse me while I
GasBandit
Staff member
You, the rest of the civilized world, and the good frenchie canuckistanians of Montreal in particular, apparently....'Cuse me while I
Hey now! If I want to invite all my friends over to sample the excellent head my girlfriend gives, that's my choice, and she shouldn't've been in there if she wasn't OK with it!...'Cuse me while I
....seriously, the guy's a moron.
GasBandit
Staff member
I think the rationale was more to the effect that naturally you DON'T want anybody else "sampling" your girlfriend, so she has to stay safely in the kitchen where you can guard her (because trespassing and breaking and entering are still crimes), because if she goes anywhere else without someone to bodyguard her, whoever fancies her might just decide to help themselves. So, the woman's universal role becomes "cowering in the kitchen hoping her spouse is considerate enough to take her desires into account when he gets the urge."
GasBandit
Staff member
Or most of the middle east.
Well, we have officially hired a new purchasing manager. This will be the 5th that I've worked under in my two years at this company. Everyone keeps talking about how smart he is, and how "casual and laid back he is". If he's casual and laid-back, this place is gonna chew him up and spit him out so fast that he won't even have a chance to plant his ass in a chair. Of course, we're all gonna give him the benefit of the doubt, but we're also bringing him in to start during our most stressful 3 week period of the year, while we're on credit hold with damn near every vendor we have an account with, and while we need next day (or same day) delivery of materials from each of them.
I saw a comment on Twitter that he was hoping to press charges after a girl through a drink in his face. Rape's all good, but you throw liquid on me? ASSAULT
YEAH ALPHA MALE
He and his RETURNOFKINGS.REAXXXXXXXION.EEEERFAMALE.SHIT cronies like to try to ruin the future prospects of people who cross them via doxxing and the like or going after them via their employers (and in some cases, threatening to file false police reports against them).
Subhuman filth.
Oh. Classy.
GasBandit
Staff member
Ok, hold on there, professor. I don't support the guy or his ideas about "legalizing rape", but this above quote is part of a discussion we've had around here more than once. Even putting aside the notion of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law (which means he is not a rapist until convicted of it, even if he writes a book entitled "I am a rapist lol" because he is an unreliable source), there is actually a very valid discussion currently going on about intoxication and consent.Just to back myself up when I'm calling him a LITERAL rapist. This is from one of his books.
He is a rapist.
GasBandit
Staff member
I think that succinctly summarizes it, yes.[DOUBLEPOST=1439409720,1439409648][/DOUBLEPOST]
So if someone is not sober enough to walk, they can't be responsible for their actions... so if they, say, then get behind the wheel of a car, they can't be responsible for that either, I take it?
Maybe this'd be better in another thread.
If they're so drunk they can't walk, they sure as fuck shouldn't be driving, though those are pretty fucking far from the same situation. There's a big difference between choosing to drive when you're physically unable, and someone else taking advantage of your impaired state to sexually assault you.
Have you ever made a bad decision while you were drunk, and later said, "If I had been in complete control of my facilities, I would NEVER have made that decision?" Of course, we all have. If someone is obviously so impaired that they're not in control of themselves, they can't give consent.
Last edited:
Yeah, look, you know I'm on the "it's not necessarily rape" side of that discussion - I do believe you're still at least somewhat responsible or your own actions when intoxicated, and if both are drunk I don't see why it's suddenly the guy's fault and the girl's the victim, by necessity, and all that jazz.
That said, if you're ("relatively") sober and she's so drunk you know she can't consent anymore, it's rape or, at the very least, sexual assault. If you "don't care" that she can't give consent, that's rapist talk, pure and simple.
The guy's a sociopath, and the type of thinker who shows why laws are necessary. He's perfectly ok with rape, except if it's illegal. He's the type of guy who needs an external set of rules, be it religious or legal, to show him what's moral and what isn't, and who'll happily do anything he can get away with that's within the letter of the law. To me, that's despicable.
That said, if you're ("relatively") sober and she's so drunk you know she can't consent anymore, it's rape or, at the very least, sexual assault. If you "don't care" that she can't give consent, that's rapist talk, pure and simple.
The guy's a sociopath, and the type of thinker who shows why laws are necessary. He's perfectly ok with rape, except if it's illegal. He's the type of guy who needs an external set of rules, be it religious or legal, to show him what's moral and what isn't, and who'll happily do anything he can get away with that's within the letter of the law. To me, that's despicable.
And I do agree this is starting to veer seriously into other thread content 
Anyway, the point is: I do believe you're responsible for your actions when you're drunk. Whether it's giving consent for sex, or getting behind the wheel of a car. Or drunk dialing your ex. That doesn't necessarily mean the other person can't be also taking advantage of you at the same time.
What makes this very, very rapey, i the "I know she couldn't consent and I didn't care" bit. Might as well include "and I got her this drunk on purpose to abuse her".
It isn't always cut and dried whether or not one side is taking advantage of the other, or both are just drunk and make a stupid move, or it wasn't clear one person was as drunk, or a whole lot of things. Knowing full well the other can't consent and taking advantage of it is wrong.
Anyway, the point is: I do believe you're responsible for your actions when you're drunk. Whether it's giving consent for sex, or getting behind the wheel of a car. Or drunk dialing your ex. That doesn't necessarily mean the other person can't be also taking advantage of you at the same time.
What makes this very, very rapey, i the "I know she couldn't consent and I didn't care" bit. Might as well include "and I got her this drunk on purpose to abuse her".
It isn't always cut and dried whether or not one side is taking advantage of the other, or both are just drunk and make a stupid move, or it wasn't clear one person was as drunk, or a whole lot of things. Knowing full well the other can't consent and taking advantage of it is wrong.
GasBandit
Staff member
But if they can't be held to the standard to make legally binding decisions, such as sexual consent, how do you logically and legally hold them to account for the decision to drive?
It basically comes down to this - either a person is responsible for what they do when they're drunk, or they're not. If they are, our consent laws are out of whack. If they aren't, our DUI laws are out of whack. I'm pretty sure which way the logic needle is going to fall on that one. You are responsible for your actions while intoxicated, so long as it was your decision to get intoxicated. That, of course, heads off the "well what if someone keeps slipping you alcohol" problem - if it wasn't your idea to ingest it, then it becomes criminal for whoever drugged you, same as if they had put cocaine in your burrito. But being drunk by your own volition cannot be a "get out of responsibility free" card.
In this case, it's actually a lot simpler. He -is- sober, and he outright says he doesn't care if she's able to consent or not. His intention is clear, he's going to have sex with her regardless of her level of consent.
GasBandit
Staff member
And so if he was not sober, it magically becomes not rape?
If two drunk drivers crash into each other, is it nobody's fault?
The discussion was calling this guy a rapist, so how much consent can be given while intoxicated isn't really a factor, that's an entirely secondary discussion. Instead, he's saying he doesn't care about consent, so he doesn't care if he's committing rape or not.