CeterisXVII:

Mumu....violence does not need to be involved in a rape case. Google it. It is lack of consent, that determines if the act is rape, or not.

What if a woman is drugged or under alcoholic influence? Even if there is no violence, it is still rape because she didn't give her consent, even though no violence was involved.

Some women get paralysed by fear when a man tries to have unwanted sexual relations with them, so the use of force will be unecessary. Not all women can struggle. Use your head and read up such cases on the internet.

Basher8583:
Synonyms for rape
assault, force, ravish, violate

Basher8583:


Olodo... No be violence you go take have your way?
Or can you explain to me the non violent aproach of forcing yourself on a woman that does not consent.
Infact for you using the word force alone is violence

CeterisXVII:

It is sexual harrassment. Your shoulder is still one of your body parts. You do not have any right to touch a stranger (who is a member of the opposite sex), on any part of their body, without their permission. Only crude illiterates do such things.

Do it abroad and see if you don't land in trouble.


What are you saying? Do you have sisters or female relatives? Why should a total stranger start putting his hands on their body? For what? Haba!!

People need to learn to respect boundaries! You asked a girl to eat. She declined. You asked a 2nd time. She still said NO. What part of the word NO, didn't you understand? Despite hearing her say NO twice, you still went and put your hands on her shoulder......the shoulder of a total stranger.. ..for what??!

He is lucky she did not give him a dirty slap, right on the spot. What gave him the right to touch any part of her body? A lady he was not friendly with, or even related to?

What he did can be interpreted as forcing unwanted sexual advances upon a lady, in a way that could lead to sexual harrassment.

MiddleDimension:


let me see if i can reply you without getting really angry and bitter with you and also insult you.

i am going to try to explain to you because i feel you are also a victim of the world and this kind of mentality and think there is nothing wrong with it even though the op wrote that he is angry not because he is was fired, but because IT WAS SAID ABOUT HIM THAT HE IS A RAPIST EVEN WHEN SUCH A THING NEVER CROSSED HIS MIND in other words, he is not bothered he lost his income, in Buhari's Nigeria, but because he was given a name that is not only not his, but he is opposed to the idea of rape. HOW DID YOU MISS THAT WONDERFUL PART AND IMMEDIATELY SEE THAT THE OP IS A DECENT PERSON which also means that even decent people can get accused of sexual harassment. i could immediately understand him.

of course you mentioned abroad and of course immediately gave yourself off as one of the majority of people in Nigeria who think the western world is the standard for knowing better what is right and what is wrong, a thing i am begining to see is a very big problem. that they do it in the western world doesn't mean they are right about it. and when it happened to me, i was like is this how men get fired from their job and in some places get imprisoned?

now to respond to you properly:
i have more sisters than i have brothers and yes, IF THEY ARE THAT BODY CONSCIOUS, THEN IT IS THEIR JOB TO STAY AWAY FROM THE SOCIETY!

A MAN TOUCHED A LADY IN THE SHOULDER, PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF THE WORD SHOULDER, AND YOU FEEL HE HAS SEXUALLY HARRASSED HER? I DON'T GET IT!

in the public, people touch each other all the time, and the office is a public place!
and please don't give me that lame excuse that the husband may come in on them at that time.... that stupid thing was told to me too and ofcourse it held because the people above me felt it is a good point.

if a man comes out and sees his wife with another man and he reads any meaning to it, then it is not because he saw them together, but because the lady must have given him reasons before to doubt her loyalty, in which case, it is not the other person's fault! no right thinking person will one day come up and seeing his woman with another man, just jump into conclusion like that especially IF SHE HAS NEVER GIVEN HIM ANY REASON TO BE SUSPECIOUS OF HER!

the same woman who told me that nonsense danced with another man, WHO IS MARRIED, when her birthday was being celebrated there at the office and they were holding themselves very close! should i now jump into conclusion that they are having an affair? if her husband comes in and starts slapping the man, or like she told me, wait till they get home and begin to beat her up while i am sleeping in my house without the woman first giving reasons way before that time to doubt her loyalty, WOULD YOU HONESTLY THINK THAT THAT MAN IS ALRIGHT IN HIS HEAD? AND EVEN IF THAT HAPPENS, HOW WOULD THAT BE THE FAULT OF THE MAN HE DANCED WITH? HOW WILL THAT BE HER FAULT? HOW WOULD IT NOT BE THE FAULT OF THE HER HUSBAND WHO IS JEALOUS! YOU CALLED HIM JEALOUS, RIGHT? THAT'S THE PROBLEM, HE IS DANGEROUSLY JEALOUS; NOT HER DANCING WITH ANOTHER MAN!

IN THE SAME WAY TOO, THE ARGUMENT THAT "DO YOU KNOW HER HUSBAND, CANNOT COME INTO PLAY HERE!

you emphasised member of the opposite sex here a lot. women touch men all the time AND MEN DO NOT THINK IT IS A VIOLATION OF THEIR OWN BODY, WHY DOES IT HAPPEN THE OTHER WAY AND THEN IT IMMEDIATELY BECOME A PROBLEM? THEY TOUCH MEN EVEN IN THE GROIN TOO YET NO WOMAN HAS EVER BEING SLAPPED FOR IT BEFORE BUT A LOT OF MEN HAVE BEING SLAPPED FOR TOUCHING KNOWINGLY OR UNKNOWINGLY, AND EVEN SOMETIMES, DID NOT EVEN TOUCH THEM AT ALL, AND THEY WERE SLAPPED IN THE FACE. THE ONLY THING YOU CAN SAY HERE IS THAT WOMEN ARE SENSITIVE TO TOUCH, AND IF THAT IS SO THAT A TOUCH IN THE SHOULDER IS SO IMPORTANT, THEN THAT'S IS A DANGEROUS LEVEL OF SENSITIVITY AND AS SUCH, THEY SHOULD STAY OUT OF THE PUBLIC.

but i know it will take a long time for people to begin to understand this just as it took a long time for people to understand that killing twins is wrong, or that FGM is wrong etc.

@merchandiser you are one of the few people who actually understand this issue.
my dear, it is not as easy as that. we need to understand one thing. men have this almost automatic behaviour of accepting blames and going soft on women even though they are not to be blamed. wasn't it akon who sang you can put the blame on me even though it wasn't even his fault a underage who doesn't look her age went to the club. he even went ahead to say even though the blame's on you, i'll take the blame from you and you can put the blame on me.

ambassadorgozie:


you have said it all, kudos.
i don't know why africans see most tins in western world as best, its tiring

MiddleDimension:
let me see if i can reply you without getting really angry and bitter with you and also insult you.

i am going to try to explain to you because i feel you are also a victim of the world and this kind of mentality and think there is nothing wrong with it even though the op wrote that he is angry not because he is was fired, but because IT WAS SAID ABOUT HIM THAT HE IS A RAPIST EVEN WHEN SUCH A THING NEVER CROSSED HIS MIND in other words, he is not bothered he lost his income, in Buhari's Nigeria, but because he was given a name that is not only not his, but he is opposed to the idea of rape. HOW DID YOU MISS THAT WONDERFUL PART AND IMMEDIATELY SEE THAT THE OP IS A DECENT PERSON which also means that even decent people can get accused of sexual harassment. i could immediately understand him.

of course you mentioned abroad and of course immediately gave yourself off as one of the majority of people in Nigeria who think the western world is the standard for knowing better what is right and what is wrong, a thing i am begining to see is a very big problem. that they do it in the western world doesn't mean they are right about it. and when it happened to me, i was like is this how men get fired from their job and in some places get imprisoned?

now to respond to you properly:
i have more sisters than i have brothers and yes, IF THEY ARE THAT BODY CONSCIOUS, THEN IT IS THEIR JOB TO STAY AWAY FROM THE SOCIETY!

A MAN TOUCHED A LADY IN THE SHOULDER, PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF THE WORD SHOULDER, AND YOU FEEL HE HAS SEXUALLY HARRASSED HER? I DON'T GET IT!

in the public, people touch each other all the time, and the office is a public place!
and please don't give me that lame excuse that the husband may come in on them at that time.... that stupid thing was told to me too and ofcourse it held because the people above me felt it is a good point.

if a man comes out and sees his wife with another man and he reads any meaning to it, then it is not because he saw them together, but because the lady must have given him reasons before to doubt her loyalty, in which case, it is not the other person's fault! no right thinking person will one day come up and seeing his woman with another man, just jump into conclusion like that especially IF SHE HAS NEVER GIVEN HIM ANY REASON TO BE SUSPECIOUS OF HER!

the same woman who told me that nonsense danced with another man, WHO IS MARRIED, when her birthday was being celebrated there at the office and they were holding themselves very close! should i now jump into conclusion that they are having an affair? if her husband comes in and starts slapping the man, or like she told me, wait till they get home and begin to beat her up while i am sleeping in my house without the woman first giving reasons way before that time to doubt her loyalty, WOULD YOU HONESTLY THINK THAT THAT MAN IS ALRIGHT IN HIS HEAD? AND EVEN IF THAT HAPPENS, HOW WOULD THAT BE THE FAULT OF THE MAN HE DANCED WITH? HOW WILL THAT BE HER FAULT? HOW WOULD IT NOT BE THE FAULT OF THE HER HUSBAND WHO IS JEALOUS! YOU CALLED HIM JEALOUS, RIGHT? THAT'S THE PROBLEM, HE IS DANGEROUSLY JEALOUS; NOT HER DANCING WITH ANOTHER MAN!

IN THE SAME WAY TOO, THE ARGUMENT THAT "DO YOU KNOW HER HUSBAND, CANNOT COME INTO PLAY HERE!

you emphasised member of the opposite sex here a lot. women touch men all the time AND MEN DO NOT THINK IT IS A VIOLATION OF THEIR OWN BODY, WHY DOES IT HAPPEN THE OTHER WAY AND THEN IT IMMEDIATELY BECOME A PROBLEM? THEY TOUCH MEN EVEN IN THE GROIN TOO YET NO WOMAN HAS EVER BEING SLAPPED FOR IT BEFORE BUT A LOT OF MEN HAVE BEING SLAPPED FOR TOUCHING KNOWINGLY OR UNKNOWINGLY, AND EVEN SOMETIMES, DID NOT EVEN TOUCH THEM AT ALL, AND THEY WERE SLAPPED IN THE FACE. THE ONLY THING YOU CAN SAY HERE IS THAT WOMEN ARE SENSITIVE TO TOUCH, AND IF THAT IS SO THAT A TOUCH IN THE SHOULDER IS SO IMPORTANT, THEN THAT'S IS A DANGEROUS LEVEL OF SENSITIVITY AND AS SUCH, THEY SHOULD STAY OUT OF THE PUBLIC.

but i know it will take a long time for people to begin to understand this just as it took a long time for people to understand that killing twins is wrong, or that FGM is wrong etc.

@merchandiser you are one of the few people who actually understand this issue.
my dear, it is not as easy as that. we need to understand one thing. men have this almost automatic behaviour of accepting blames and going soft on women even though they are not to be blamed. wasn't it akon who sang you can put the blame on me even though it wasn't even his fault a underage who doesn't look her age went to the club. he even went ahead to say even though the blame's on you, i'll take the blame from you and you can put the blame on me.

CeterisXVII:

I never called the guy a rapist, neither did I infer that he was one.

I merely spoke about the fact that he touched her without her permission.

Touching a person without their permission, anywhere on their body is WRONG, especially if the person you are touching is a member of the opposite sex!

That is the rule. CONSENT or PERMISSION are the key terms here. If you have it, there is nothing to fear. If you don't, you could be looking at a case of sexual harassment.

As for the dancing couple, the woman must have agreed to dance, and extended her hand to be held by her partner.

If she did not consent to a dance, but was dragged to the dance floor and held there against her will, without her permission, it is HARASSMENT! Try this in the Western world and you will be detained.

Now does that answer your question, or do you want to write another long epistle?

MiddleDimension:
stop pretenfing you are being fair here. i made the point that women touch men all the time and you don't get the same out cry, why.must it be the other way round and there is this nonsense going on?

IF WOMEN ARE THAT BODY CONSCIOUS, THEN THEY SHOULD STAY IN THEIR FUUUUCKING HOUSES LIKE IT IS OBTAINED IN SHARIAH SOCIETIES, SIMPLE!

I AM DEFINITELY BEGINING TO SEE THE WISDOM IN SHARIAH ALREADY! MAYBE THEY UNDERSTAND BETTER THAN WE DO.

IF YOU LEAVE YOUR HOUSE, YOU CANNOT BE VERY UPTIGHT BECAUSE THERE IS INTERACTION IN THE WORLD OUTSIDE OF YOUR DOMAIN. IF YOU ARE THAT PRECIOUS, THEN YOU STAY IN DOORS, SIMPLE!

CeterisXVII:

I never called the guy a rapist, neither did I infer that he was one.

I merely spoke about the fact that he touched her without her permission.

Touching a person without their permission, anywhere on their body is WRONG, especially if the person you are touching is a member of the opposite sex!

That is the rule. CONSENT or PERMISSION are the key terms here. If you have it, there is nothing to fear. If you don't, you could be looking at a case of sexual harassment.

As for the dancing couple, the woman must have agreed to dance, and extended her hand to be held by her partner.

If she did not consent to a dance, but was dragged to the dance floor and held there against her will, without her permission, it is HARASSMENT! Try this in the Western world and you will be detained.

Now does that answer your question, or do you want to write another long epistle?

MiddleDimension:
i think certain things are better understood through experience. and please don't fool yourself it will never happen to you. i was like you. the op is like you. didn't you hear him say he knows it is wrong to rape or to sexually harass people? just like you, he has that mind set. i am beginning to see that men and women interaction doesn't play by logic. in other words, what is right is not what's logical.

when it happens, then you will understand my point. the op probably before now, would not understand it. time and experience clears all doubts!

as for your stubborn insistence on bringing in the western world, let me tell you a few things.
sometime ago at the university, a friend of mine bought a mini laptop and he asked him to help work on it and install an anti virus.
his computer came with Smavdav anti virus and the smavdav was so potent, once you insert any device like a flash drive, it quickly scans it automatically and very quickly.

now, despite this potency, i tried to uninstall the smavdav, an asian product, which i wasn't able to do in the end, and install avast, a european product simply because for me, the best i knew at the time was avast and because it is a european product, so i felt it would be better. when i installed the avast, despite the fact that we both could see that the avast at the time did not automatically scan anything you insert into the computer, i still insisted it was better than the smavdav. the only reason, it is european, i actually thought it is american, and it was all i knew at the time.

another example: america's whatsapp and chinese wechat, if you have ever used the two, there will be no need to talk about which is better. the only reason i still use whatsapp is because it is widely spread around the world more than wechat is, and it is what my family uses. but when it comes to functionalities, there is no comparison.

i will give you another example:
there is a sense in western culture that words on their own do not have a particular meaning, that is, the meaning of words are what we ascribe to it. that is why words like bias, occult, etc, could have their meaning and usage change over time. so when you mention the words occult, what comes to the mind now, is not just that which is hidden and known only to a few who could comprehend it, but evil. over time, it acquired this connotation.

but among other cultures around the world especially in india, words already have their meaning before it became known to you and will always have that particular meaning and effect no matter what. these are the words that form their mantras. it is believed that these words, if intoned the proper way can have have manifest implications. i as an atheist, do not believe in those things as i have never experienced it, but if that is true, wouldn't it shatter the western idea of subjectivity of the meaning of words?

i am more western inclined like many people around the world. but i am beginning to realise they do not have it all figured out.
Ronald Regan said "...a troubled world looks to the US as a shinning light on a hill." but there other lights too, and there are hills everywhere!

Hussein Obama said to the british house of parlliarment on the occasion of his state visit to the UK in attempt to re-affirm their ties that through the struggle of slaves, women; their fight against the Nazis and their struggle against the crown, they have learned better than most that the longing for freedom and human dignity is...universal and it beats in every heart.

he tried to make a statement of superiority of experience. but the question is: what kind of person has to fight bloody battles, march on the streets and organise boycotts in order to understand the simple thing that all humans are equal, and from that equality, they derive rights that are inallignable among which are the pursuit of happiness, freedom and dignity? i mean this is something so simple that when you sit down and experience your own life, you naturally extend that beauty you experience to other people and project it on them, treating them the same way you treat yourself and would like to be treated. that you had to fight and march on the street to be able to understand this SIMPLE thing, only shows the corruption that is endemic among such a people!

they have not even been able to understand this very well. that's why you find inconsistences among them. when a highly qualified and experienced Iweala was up for the world bank job, even the liberal democrat president Obama did not even favour her. the same Obama who said that thing up there. instead, he went for a person who does not even have a background in that area at all, prompting Iweala to lament that they, the west, should practice what they preach.

i can go on and on and on. but since you are allergic to detailed explanation and called it lengthy epistle, let me end it here.

Audinowing:

Why concluding so fast? Have you heard the lady's side of the story? What makes you think or believe the OP is telling the whole truth? You beg someone to rest or eat, she refuses and the next thing you go put your hand on her shoulder to convince her to rest. How nice the OP is.