Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Right Wing Italians propose castrating rapists

2

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A man can't stop? Or won't stop?

    I think he's omparing a man who's having sex with someone, who then wants to stop, and the man continues anyway - to a man who set out to rape someone. I think, personally, there is a difference there, as the first is more of a 'heat of the moment' thing - like people who murder out of extreme anger (find their partner cheating) and the second is a premeditated act.

    The issue at the heart of this thread is the rights of the rapist - or in more general terms, the offender. If it was a thief, would they be allowed to go free one day without any chemical alteration even if they have robbed someone of the freedom of security in their own home. Should a rapist be allowed to go free, even though they've stolen the freedom of life from their victim.

    Because if we decide that by infringing upon the rights of others, they have given up their own rights - then by all means chemical castration is fine (though, possibly not effective). However, if we decide that they are still human beings - and once they have been rehabilitated and atoned for their sins that they should have the same rights as others, then I don't think mutilation can ever be considered. Unless, as in the case of France, a voluntary system was set up to help offenders overcome their... afflication? I don't know the word.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A man can't stop? Or won't stop?


    okay what about if was at the point of no return so to speak......


    what about a girl who decides she didnt want to do it, the next day ie she realised she made a bad deicsion and thus had a bad experience we all have them what if she goes to the police then?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Telegraph story

    do what the telegraph says, burn them, well they dont say that, its what a woman did to her daughters rapist

    A Spanish mother has taken revenge on the man who raped her 13-year-old daughter at knifepoint by dousing him in petrol and setting him alight. He died of his injuries in hospital on Friday.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm delighted for that Spanish woman. She should be given a medal, she did to that scum what the state should have done in the first place.

    If a man is having consensual sex with a woman and she withdraws that consent, then he is a rapist if he doesn't withdraw immediately. And he should be treated as such.

    I don't think there is any point to mutilation, because rapists will rape with or without the relevant appendages. I can't find the report although I've googled, but it has been shown in the US that castration- chemical or otherwise- doesn't work.

    Yes, I am basing my belief on emotion not on intellect. But I don't think rapists deserve to live.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes, he should be treated as such. But it is also fair to say that not all rapes and rapists are the same (just as not all killings as the same), and I don't think it would be appropriate to give a blanket life without parole sentence to all convicted rapists.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    But it is also fair to say that not all rapes and rapists are the same (just as not all killings as the same), and I don't think it would be appropriate to give a blanket life without parole sentence to all convicted rapists.

    I think I would agree that not all rapes and rapists are the same.

    It is very easy to think that the bogeyman rapist, the knife-wielding maniac, is the "worst" kind of rapist, and that husbands or partners who systematically use rape as a weapon in domestic violence aren't as bad. I don't really agree with that, I think they are both just as bad in their own way.

    I do think that mitigation should be taken into account. But men who refuse to withdraw are vermin of the highest order, and I don't think original consent is any mitigation.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just a thought, but isn't it a little late to withdraw consent after penetration?

    What difference would it make?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just a thought, but isn't it a little late to withdraw consent after penetration?

    What difference would it make?
    As soon as the person withdraws consent then it is rape if the man remains inside her. There is caselaw to support this.

    He can't be charged with rape for the consensual part of the intercourse though.

    What difference it makes to the woman, I don't know. But to say that it shouldn't be allowed is wrong.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    What difference it makes to the woman, I don't know. But to say that it shouldn't be allowed is wrong.

    It was the difference thing I was interested in. I don't dispute the right to withdraw consent, I just can't understand why someone would do that after penetration... surely it's too late.

    Okay so the man may not have ejaculated, and I can see the possible interest from that perspective but otherwise... :confused:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I suppose it allows the woman to change her mind at any time, and sometimes things do go too far and the woman wants to stop them after they've started.

    I suppose it is about that: if a woman makes a mistake and allows penetration at first, it means she can stop it at any time. If you realise its gone too far its better to be able to stop it than have to endure it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So what did the case law say, is there a link to the case so I can have a look?

    This issue is intriging...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't have the case name to hand, I'll dig it out when I get home.

    Basically it said that a woman can withdraw her consent at any time during the act, and the man must immediately withdraw from the act or else he is guilty of rape.

    I think it makes perfect sense to have the law like this. If the woman feels uncomfortable having sex, for any reason, then there should be a criminal sanction to persuade the man that it is in his best interests to cease penetration. Consent cannot be withdrawn after the act, but it can be withdrawn during it, for this obvious reason.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yea keep 'em locked up

    You really think that'll work? I wish it did. How many rapsist get life and do the full shebang without parole?

    Look at that child killing rapist Roy Whiting or what ever his name was. What he done was beyond disgusting and he has been able to out into the world.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's painful, the woman realises she's too too tired/not in the mood, the guy does or says something that turns her off...

    See, I needed a female perspective. The first and last I can understand, the middle one makes me wonder why she would have got into such a position in the first place ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's painful, the woman realises she's too too tired/not in the mood, the guy does or says something that turns her off...


    does that work if the guy get his eyesight back and realises that its well some lady he wuldnt like normally
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A man can't stop? Or won't stop?

    lol, look, during the latter stages of fucking, there's no way a man can just stop once he's reached "lock-on". Maybe this is a grey area in the law, i'm not sure...but you certainly can't call for the castration of all rapists, it's completely reactionary & immoral.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Of course he can stop. He chooses not to.

    Calling for the castration of rapists is only wrong because it wouldn't make a difference. Executing them would though.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    TBH - if I was doing the beast with two backs and my wife told me it was hurting I'd stop even if the law didn't say it was rape. I'm guessing that and calling out her sister's name are the main causes of women asking men to stop and that women who decide to change their because she decides she's no longer in the mood are probably pretty rare.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    Executing them would though.

    You're not being serious, right?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You're not being serious, right?
    I'm being deadly serious.

    Vermin such as that thing who raped and murdered the Cornish girl should be nailed to a wall and left to slowly bleed to death. And even that is too good for them.

    I am only opposed to the death penalty because courts make decisions and kill innocent people. Ten rapists being alive is better than one innocent death. But if there was a way of being 100% certain of a rapist's guilt then I would have no problems in executing them. I'd probably hold the gun to their head.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    But if there was a way of being 100% certain of a rapist's guilt then I would have no problems in executing them. I'd probably hold the gun to their head.

    DNA?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Only about 99.9% certain, when some is found.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    DNA?


    yws dna is 99.99% specific but not the circumstance when its found
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    DNA isn't 100% accurate.

    DNA often isn't relevant anyway: the man admits having sex with the woman, but argues that she consented.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    DNA isn't 100% accurate.

    DNA often isn't relevant anyway: the man admits having sex with the woman, but argues that she consented.


    which is where it gets difficult

    personally id like to see all rapists get raped themselves
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :yeees:

    Of course there is. Whether he wants to or not is a different matter. Men aren't some poor helpless creatures completely under the control of their libido, and that goes for any stage of rape.

    That's complete nonsense...someone who physically assaults and rapes a women, the enounter being forced from start to finish, is obviously guilty of a heneous crime, but that's completely different from the theoretical instance of a man having to finish off after reaching a certain point. I'd imagine most males would agree with me on this, unless they have never had a sexual experience (including masturbation). A woman cannot claim rape fairly in such a case.

    Rapists i imagine are pyschologically troubled people, possibly being victims of sexual abuse themselves...to start executing rapists as Kermit suggests has a certain self-defeating irony to it.

    And where do we draw the line? I can vaguely empathise with supporters of the death penalty for mass murderers and shit, but to call for capital punishment or castration as the standard for rape is absolutely textbook knee-jerk reaction.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote:
    That's complete nonsense...someone who physically assaults and rapes a women, the enounter being forced from start to finish, is obviously guilty of a heneous crime, but that's completely different from the theoretical instance of a man having to finish off after reaching a certain point.

    What a load of crap.

    If a woman says "get out" a man should get out immediately. If he does not he is a rapist, and should be treated as a rapist. A man doesn't "need to finish off" at all, he can always use his hand.

    Or are you suggesting that women are little more than a handy receptacle for come, and that their rights are worth less than a male's right to come in peace?
    I'd imagine most males would agree with me on this, unless they have never had a sexual experience (including masturbation). A woman cannot claim rape fairly in such a case.

    A man can always pull out. If he doesn't he is a cunt.

    Why can't a woman fairly claim rape if the man refuses to withdraw?

    Where do you draw the line? The end of penetration? The beginning? A blowjob? Kissing in the club? Wearing a slinky dress?

    Obviously women who dare to change their mind deserve to be raped. Asking for it, they are.
    Rapists i imagine are pyschologically troubled people, possibly being victims of sexual abuse themselves...to start executing rapists as Kermit suggests has a certain self-defeating irony to it.

    Does it?

    If they're dead they can't repeat the circle of abuse.

    If they're dead they can't do it again.

    I don't care if they are troubled or not, people like Sutcliffe, Imiela and that Spaniard deserve a slow painful and horrific death. I'd quite gladly provide it for them, too.
    And where do we draw the line? I can vaguely empathise with supporters of the death penalty for mass murderers and shit, but to call for capital punishment or castration as the standard for rape is absolutely textbook knee-jerk reaction.

    It very probably is.

    I class rape as the very worst crime of all. You can't accidentally rape someone. You can't rape someone by "going too far". You can't rape someone in a blind rage.

    The effects it has on the victims are horrific. The effects it has on the families of the victims is horrific. Rapists cannot be tolerated in any society, and the best way of solving that is to kill them. They deserve it.

    It is reactionary and it is revenge not justice. But when it comes to rapists, revenge is the only solution to the problem. Taking out the trash.
Sign In or Register to comment.