lanaVello1: in what jurisdiction is the boldened act criminalized as rape

in the united states.
google is your friend

coogar:

are you kidding me?
consent was given to the act, consent wasn't given for the man to ejacülate. she told her hubby to pull out but the hubby refused telling her "i am your husband and i shall do what i please". she got pregnant as a result & she took the matter to court.

at first hearing, the case was dismissed then it went to the high court & 3 lord judges deliberated and re-examined the case. this time they came with a verdict that it was räpe since her choice was taken away from her. i will look into my archives later & send you the link. even british women were embarrassed with the ridiculousness of the verdict & how it's a mockery to the genuine victims of räpe.

just so you know - a woman can never räpe a man in the west. at worst, she can only get sëxual assault. the only instance women get charged for rapë is when she's an accomplice to a man räping another woman.

so if a woman spikes your drink & mounts you without your consent, it doesn't amount to räpe. the explanation is only a man carries an organ that can penetrate so women cân never râpe.

Weird gender equality.

you are right bro!
in this century, it's a criminal offence on it's own to be male.

ihedinobi2:
Your claim to prove. As for ejäculation, I was also addressing it accordingly. It is as ridiculous in one case as it would be as a general rule. And the fact that it went to court is proof of the rank idiõcy running your judicial systems.

First of all, the woman in the case stipulated that the man shouldnt e.jaculate on her. The case is unique. It can go to court because the man violated a contract. But it is not rap£ from the angle I put above.

So, you talking about a general rule is just plain silliness.

ihedinobi2:
It was you who said that the line between right and wrong is clear for us. It is also you who are saying now that it isn't. It's your integrity to do with as you please.

Yes, it is clear for christians. Each christian's interpretation of the bible is the objective morality of God (For him or her).

I was pointing out the contradiction and delusions in christians like you claiming objective morality.

You cant even talk about integrity with a rap£ thread like this that you opened. That's hypocrisy

ihedinobi2:
I'm not ignoring my continent. But even if I were, the West would not be doing better merely because Africa is doing badly. That's just weird reasoning.

lol.....the very debate we are having about laws is a result of western laws and precedent.


Yet, the ignorant and arrogant African in you is claiming that Western society is degenerating

Does Nigeria have established/enforced internet laws that Western society has?
Does Nigeria have privacy laws like Western countries?



Better use your brain

TheBigUrban2:
Coogar can lie

i don't expect you to know beyond your nose. when someone doesn't agree with your stance, the next thing is to throw insults & brand him a liar.

well, lemme educate you - go on google and search for digital räpe. look at the few cases & the people that have been convicted with the charge. come back here & apologise for your lack of exposure.

coogar:

no, it doesn't
a woman has to say yes to sex to qualify it as consensual sex. lack of resistance does not suggest consensual sex. lawyers will use the technicality that she was too scared or too shocked to resist. this is why i said rapë cases are very complex cases.

That's simply not true especially in the example being discussed.

coogar:

i don't expect you to know beyond your nose. when someone doesn't agree with your stance, the next thing is to throw insults & brand him a liar.

well, lemme educate you - go on google and search for digital räpe. look at the few cases & the people that have been convicted with the charge. come back here & apologise for your lack of exposure.

Lack of exposure?

Do you even know why I called you a liar?

coogar:

i don't expect you to know beyond your nose. when someone doesn't agree with your stance, the next thing is to throw insults & brand him a liar.

well, lemme educate you - go on google and search for digital räpe. look at the few cases & the people that have been convicted with the charge. come back here & apologise for your lack of exposure.

It is not that digital rap£ doesnt exist....the lying part is where you claimed that the girl grabbed the boy's joystick. If she did, it would be hard for her to claim rap£ and escape it being dropped as a false/unfounded claim

ihedinobi2: Weird gender equality.

Radical feminism is a terrible kind of madness.

coogar:

are you kidding me?
consent was given to the act, consent wasn't given for the man to ejacülate. she told her hubby to pull out but the hubby refused telling her "i am your husband and i shall do what i please". she got pregnant as a result & she took the matter to court.

at first hearing, the case was dismissed then it went to the high court & 3 lord judges deliberated and re-examined the case. this time they came with a verdict that it was räpe since her choice was taken away from her. i will look into my archives later & send you the link. even british women were embarrassed with the ridiculousness of the verdict & how it's a mockery to the genuine victims of räpe.




just so you know - a woman can never räpe a man in the west. at worst, she can only get sëxual assault. the only instance women get charged for rapë is when she's an accomplice to a man räping another woman.

so if a woman spikes your drink & mounts you without your consent, it doesn't amount to räpe. the explanation is only a man carries an organ that can penetrate so women cân never râpe.

I'm still curious to read the facts of that case..aii,until then sha.
That is so because most american states now refer to the act as sex.ual assault nd d likes and as a matter of fact the US federal laws doesnt use the word 'r@pe' and a woman can actually be charged for assaulting a man sexually.
Btw are u speculating here or stating facts because the penalty for that act of spiking drinks can be up to 15 years gender notwithstanding!

MrAnony1:
That's simply not true especially in the example being discussed.

i am telling you what obtains in my neck of the woods & you are saying it's not true. you must be having a laugh. a woman must consent 100% for it to be sex......otherwise, it's räpe!

TheBigUrban2:
Lack of exposure?
Do you even know why I called you a liar?

pray tell - why am i a liar?

TheBigUrban2:
It is not that digital rap£ doesnt exist....the lying part is where you claimed that the girl grabbed the boy's joystick. If she did, it would be hard for her to claim rap£ and escape it being dropped as a false/unfounded claim

i only cited a case of what usually happens in parties. just because a woman grabbed a man's còck does not mean she wants sëx. penetration or intrusion of her vagïna alone is digital räpe if she did not give consent to it.

in massachusetts, "penetration" does not have to be extensive: the commonwealth can satisfy this element by simply proving that there was a slight intrusion into the vägina, or that the lâbia or vulvä was even touched by the male.

coogar:

in the united states.
google is your friend

i think you shud take your advice

coogar: i am telling you what obtains in my neck of the woods & you are saying it's not true. you must be having a laugh. a woman must consent 100% for it to be sex......otherwise, it's räpe!

And I am telling you that if that is the case in your neck of the woods, then the law makers at your end are upholding an unjust law.

MrAnony1: Radical feminism is a terrible kind of madness.

Ihedinobi would just say "Feminism"

He already believes that feminism is radical

TheBigUrban2:

Coogar can lie

based on the few fallacies i've seen in his post....i'm beginning to concur

lanaVello1: i think you shud take your advice

there's no point debating with stark illiterates.

MrAnony1:
And I am telling you that if that is the case in your neck of the woods, then the law makers at your end are upholding an unjust law.

who cares whether the law is just or unjust? when there's no law, there's no crime. when there's law then there's simply no excuse. it's just baffling that learned people like you are so stiff to learn beyond your noses.

it's a shame!

TheBigUrban2:

First of all, the woman in the case stipulated that the man shouldnt e.jaculate on her. The case is unique. It can go to court because the man violated a contract. But it is not rap£ from the angle I put above.

So, you talking about a general rule is just plain silliness.

This is such a ridiculous comeback that the first time I read it, my brain dozed off after laughing. Tell me exactly what contract was voided abeg. Again, tell me why the woman's stipulation made any kind of sense.

Finally, how exactly did I talk about a general rule that you're making so much of it?

Yes, it is clear for christians. Each christian's interpretation of the bible is the objective morality of God (For him or her).

I was pointing out the contradiction and delusions in christians like you claiming objective morality.

You cant even talk about integrity with a rap£ thread like this that you opened. That's hypocrisy

Let's get you well: Christians each have their own moral code depending on what they prefer to read from the Bible but Christians also have an objective code that clearly delineates wrong and right. Are you sure that is what you meant to say? That Christians both have an objective morality and don't have one? Like I said, it's your integrity.

lol.....the very debate we are having about laws is a result of western laws and precedent.

No, it's the result of Western madness.

Yet, the ignorant and arrogant African in you is claiming that Western society is degenerating

Does Nigeria have established/enforced internet laws that Western society has?
Does Nigeria have privacy laws like Western countries?



Better use your brain

And these prove that the West is not degenerating how exactly?

coogar:

there's no point debating with stark illiterates.

haba...na fight? only losers resort to name-callings when on the verge of losing argument....c'mon we all learn everday afterall

MrAnony1: Radical feminism is a terrible kind of madness.

TheBigUrban2:

Ihedinobi would just say "Feminism"

He already believes that feminism is radical

If you want to educate me on the different forms of feminism, you have my blessing.

lanaVello1: haba...na fight? only losers resort to name-callings when on the verge of losing argument....c'mon we all learn everday afterall

you have lost already.
i have been able to educate you on what your 20+ years of formal education failed to achieve. prior to this day, i doubt you have ever heard of the term digital räpe. if you stop reading gossip magazines & pay attention to the world beyond you, my posts wouldn't have been shocking to you.

ihedinobi2:
If you want to educate me on the different forms of feminism, you have my blessing.

this is the case of the woman that claimed her hubby räped her.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2314469/Men-convicted-rape-woman-agrees-sex.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#article-2314469.

coogar:
who cares whether the law is just or unjust? when there's no law, there's no crime. when there's law then there's simply no excuse.

Really? So you don't care if the law is just or unjust? I see.

it's just baffling that learned people like you are so stiff to learn beyond your noses.

it's a shame!

What exactly was I supposed to learn and why is it shameful that I didn't?

you can either admit ur mistake of saying the drink spiking stuff because it is total crap or just give your fingers a break..

MrAnony1:
Really? So you don't care if the law is just or unjust? I see.

i only obey the laws - whether it's just or unjust is purely an academic point.

What exactly was I supposed to learn and why is it shameful that I didn't?

you thought the instance i cited was pulled out of the arsê of a baboon. instead of you to do your research & check if i was right, you called me a liar. i have never seen such display of lack of manners in my entire life.

coogar:


this is the case of the woman that claimed her hubby räped her.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2314469/Men-convicted-rape-woman-agrees-sex.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#article-2314469.

Bros, you lied na.....the case was more nuanced than you put.


The judge even echoed my thoughts on the matter. If the guy reasonably tried not to e.jaculate in her, the case would have been dismissed. The guy has already had a history of being abusive and the wife didnt want another child. He refused to withdraw and insisted he had the right because she was his wife

coogar: this is the case of the woman that claimed her hubby räped her.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2314469/Men-convicted-rape-woman-agrees-sex.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#article-2314469.

Hilarity

Lord Judge looks like he'd make a great comedian even in that wig.

TheBigUrban2:

Ihedinobi would just say "Feminism"

He already believes that feminism is radical

To be honest, the modern feminism of the 21st century is more or less radical. Nearly if not all aims of feminism have already been accomplished.

TheBigUrban2:


Bros, you lied na.....the case was more nuanced than you put.


The judge even echoed my thoughts on the matter. If the guy reasonably tried not to e.jaculate in her, the case would have been dismissed. The guy has already had a history of being abusive and the wife didnt want another child. He refused to withdraw and insisted he had the right because she was his wife

Let's talk about what makes sense, bro. The fact that this guy had a history may have colored every single breath he took, yes and the fact that the woman didn't want any more children is a very important too. But here is the important question: do you know sexüal frenzy?

TheBigUrban2:
Bros, you lied na.....the case was more nuanced than you put.
The judge even echoed my thoughts on the matter. If the guy reasonably tried not to e.jaculate in her, the case would have been dismissed. The guy has already had a history of being abusive and the wife didnt want another child. He refused to withdraw and insisted he had the right because she was his wife

you are a consummate rëtard!
it's his wife not a whorë from a brothel. if she was so concerned about his semën, why didn't she wear a femidom? what about the other 10+ contraceptive measures open to her? why did this case even get to court at all if you have any iota of common sense? how effective is withdrawal method?

there you go - your 20+ years of formal education was put to sword within few minutes. i think you are a disgrace to the village that sponsored your education!

MrAnony1:
To be honest, the modern feminism of the 21st century is more or less radical. Nearly if not all aims of feminism have already been accomplished.

I agree. Having a woman under the heels of a man is NOT popular anymore. But having a man under the heels of a woman?

coogar:
i only obey the laws - whether it's just or unjust is purely an academic point.

I see, so why do you obey the laws if you don't care if they are just or unjust?

you thought the instance i cited was pulled out of the arsê of a baboon. instead of you to do your research & check if i was right, you called me a liar. i have never seen such display of lack of manners in my entire life.

Please quote where I did this.

MrAnony1:
To be honest, the modern feminism of the 21st century is more or less radical. Nearly if not all aims of feminism have already been accomplished.

#ignorance+Anonyism


#equal pay
#polygamy
#women's sexual health