Right Wing Italians propose castrating rapists

Former Member

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?

Yeah, because I even hinted at women being a "receptacle", didn't I? :rolleyes:

If you were to conduct an experiment with 100 young men having sex, and just towards the end stage you say "stop", i doubt more than about 10 of them would be able to do so.

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?

Again, you're twisting my words around. A woman can't fairly claim rape if a man doesn't withdraw, say, in the very brief lead-up to the orgasm. I imagine the law takes this into account although presumably it's still classed as rape. If you're suggesting someone should be executed for something like this...well, you're emotions are obstructing your common sense.

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.

Give it a rest eh?

Of course a woman has the right to change her mind...4/5th of the way through however, the issue of what's clearly malicious in intent is more than a little clouded.

Former Member

Spliffie wrote:

If you were to conduct an experiment with 100 young men having sex, and just towards the end stage you say "stop", i doubt more than about 10 of them would be able to do so.

They would all be able to, not all would though.

Former Member

Spliffie wrote:

Yeah, because I even hinted at women being a "receptacle", didn't I? :rolleyes:

But you did.

You are valuing the orgasm over the woman's right to choose when to stop.

If you were to conduct an experiment with 100 young men having sex, and just towards the end stage you say "stop", i doubt more than about 10 of them would be able to do so.

Of course they would be able to stop until they were actually ejaculating.

They might not do, but they would be able to.

Again, you're twisting my words around. A woman can't fairly claim rape if a man doesn't withdraw, say, in the very brief lead-up to the orgasm. I imagine the law takes this into account although presumably it's still classed as rape.

Unless the man ejaculates as the woman says stop, then that is a non-argument. And in that circumstance it wouldn't be rape.

Of course a woman has the right to change her mind...4/5th of the way through however, the issue of what's clearly malicious in intent is more than a little clouded.

Who mentioned malicious intent?

The law is quite simple. If you are penetrating a woman without her consent then it is rape. If you continue to penetrate a woman after she withdraws her consent then it is rape. If you penetrate a woman indifferent to consent then it is rape if the woman does not consent.

Malicious intent is not a factor. The only time the mens rea counts is if the male genuinely believes that the woman consents.

Former Member

But you did.

You are valuing the orgasm over the woman's right to choose when to stop.

I didn't say anything like that. You're bullshitting/misunderstanding. Possibly both.

Of course they would be able to stop until they were actually ejaculating.

They might not do, but they would be able to.

Unless the man ejaculates as the woman says stop, then that is a non-argument. And in that circumstance it wouldn't be rape.

Maybe about 10 seconds before climax, it wouldn't be as easy as "just pulling out". It'd be nigh on impossible just before climax, we've evolved sexually in a manner which makes that thoroughly unrealistic.

Who mentioned malicious intent?

I did. And i wasn't talking about in a legal sense.

The law is quite simple. If you are penetrating a woman without her consent then it is rape. If you continue to penetrate a woman after she withdraws her consent then it is rape. If you penetrate a woman indifferent to consent then it is rape if the woman does not consent.
QUOTE]

Ok, quick question. A woman comes on to a man in a club. They end up shagging, he's going full at it and is approaching orgasm when the woman suddenly feels guilty because she's married and says "stop". He can't, and finishes the job in a few seconds. Technically, he's guilty of rape, but the courts would take the exact circumstances into account...going by your logic, it'd be straight to the gallows, right?

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

They would all be able to, not all would though.

Next time you're whacking yourself off, try stopping an estimated 5 seconds before orgasm. You'll understand what i'm talking about.

Former Member

In your hypothetical situation he wouldn't be guilty of rape if it was a reasonable delay. More than a few seconds and it'd be unreasonable, and rightly so.

I would be clement in situations like that. Any use of violence or force and it'd be different.