₦airaland Forum

elampiro: Na wa! Else where people are voting Rooney or Jones as the man of the match. May be it depends on the way we look at things. Last week SAF said Jones will be the United greatest ever.

rooney as the MOTM?
with his misplaced passes and general poor play? fergie is just being funny. jones will never be even considered to be better than djemba-djemba if he doesn't play in the defence(as a centre half) - that is his natural position. his positioning and technique is 4th grade.

MRbrownJAY: again, you are looking at the wrong issue here: what they did prior to the act is not important since it was consensual, the act of forcing her to do an act that she had said earlier she was against, is the reason why this was considered ra.pe (imho).

where was this force? the man got carried away - he couldn't bring himself to withdraw. the more engaged someone gets into the act, the less control one has!

bro Coogar, if i have sex with a woman who says beforehand that she does NOT want to have an.al sex, and during the act i do it against her will (because i changed my mind or because thats what i wanted from the beginning) would you call that RA:PE or DECEIT?

this analogy is way off the mark!
you cannot compare the ability to withdraw/not withdraw to sex deviance. every sex congress should lead to ejaculatiön, not every sex congress leads remotely to anäl sëx. this husband did not deviate from the act that was agreed, he just lost control at the vital moment which is simply a breach of trust, not rapë!

[quote author=mondi_cheeks]the unlawful and intention sexual penetration of another without valid consent applies to all married or not...she withdrew consent and he ingored it and carried on, violating what they had agreed upon before..which is for him not to cum inside her. If he had pulled out like they had agreed before they had se.x, the woman's defence would have been baseless...[/quote]she didn't withdraw consent
where did you read that from? at no point did she withdraw consent. read the article very well! her claims to being räped is hinged on what was agreed before the act!

a breach of trust is NOT rapë!!!

MRbrownJAY: and this is why i have said that the sex is irrelevant, because this is not a case of ra.pe but DECEIT. at NO TIME during the sex you did something sexual against her wishes. the fact that you are not muslim is a case of deceit, not ra.pe!

by the same token, the fact that this man agreed to withdraw knowing fully well he wouldn't withdraw is just deceit. this woman agreed the husband could have vagïnal sex with her. he didn't deviate from that.

on the other hand, in this case the husband did something sexual against her wishes. how can you say this is the same thing? remember, the fact that she wouldnt have known is irrelevant. if i listen to your analogy, then if i give a date ra.pe drug to a lady and ra.pe her (but she doesnt know it because she was unconscious) it is NOT ra,pe?! come on now!
whether wifey knew or not is not the point, the hubby did something to her sexually that he fully well knew she was AGAINST.

wrong analogy, MBJ
vagïnal sex was agreed, man had vagïnal sex - the act was agreed, the deceit was the problem. if the man had been honest before the act, the woman wouldn't have agreed. it's not the act that is the problem, but the deceit - just like in the case of alimat/coogar.

[quote author=mondi_cheeks]physical force is not a requirement for rape...consent and it has to be valid consent. Sex.ual intercourse wit a person under age, intoxicated or extremely drunk can constitute as rape because these people are regarded not to be in a position to give valid consent to sex.ual intercourse...why do u think pple still get charged wit statutory rape after sleeping wit an under age person even if that minor gave consent [/quote]sex with a minor is a different ball game.
this woman is not a minor nor is she a random person...she's his wife! the only discrepancy was what was agreed before the act. no force or disagreement happened during the act!

MRbrownJAY: this is how i see this scenario, and why i believe the judge sentenced this guy to ra.pe (and nothing else):
the wife said (before the sex) she didnt want to be pregnant and thus she asked hubby to pull out in due time.
the hubby agreed and they started having sex. during the sex and when the hubby was about to cuum, she asked him to pull out (as agreed) but he then said that he will do what he wants and forced her (against her will) to stay put while he relieved himself......thus that is why the judge said that this was ra.pe (and he was right).

these are all MBJ's assumptions but nevertheless, the hubby would have been guilty of abuse if he did it any other way against her will......but by the info we are getting on this story, my above scenario COULD have been the case, and is ra.pe!

yes, they are assumptions!
in my opinion, this woman is just a troublemaker - she's claiming räpe because of disappointment or deceit. not because she said no and the man pressed on regardless.

elampiro: Personally, I always want Rooney to finish our games (play the whole 90 minutes).

rooney was shyte all through the time he was on the pitch!

MRbrownJAY: the problem is that you forgot the most important part of the beast man's act: he said (probably when about to cuum) HE WILL DO WHAT HE WANT......thus "forcing" her to accept his change of plans (probably against her will)

that can be argued.......her word against his!
i doubt his rapê conviction would stand - he could be guilty of abuse but certainly not rapë. there was no physical force used. the only discrepancy was what was agreed before the act!

MRbrownJAY: when some people have nothing to say, they throw insults to smoke screen the fact that they have nothing intelligent to bring to the discussion.

thought as much!

so if i understand you carefully, if a gal agreed to have an.al sex before the acrobatics, and suddenly the guy decides to jam his dikc insode her aass, it shouldnt be ra.pe or abuse, simply because they were having sex?!
anything that is done AGAINST A PERSON's WISH is ra.pe or abuse. how can someone change his mind without informing the participant first? how does that make this act any RIGHT? what institution do you know that will accept such change of contract? the ONLY thing that she can rely upon is what was agrred before the sex, because thats what is relevant.

but this analogy is not even close to what this guy did.
the agreement was penetrate, thrust as much as you want but no spilling of seeds in her. the man got everything right until the spillage. in the case you cited, the woman would verbally or physically object the action of the man. in the case we are discussing, the woman never said no during the act! if she did, that was räpe! the only thing she is laying claims to was what was agreed before the act!

MRbrownJAY: Coogar would be guilty of deceit because the sex is irrelevant to your religious status. she agreed to have sex with you and was conned into believing that you had the same religious beliefs. she willfully had sex with you (whether through deceit or con)and you did not force her into doing something that she specifically asked you NOT to do beforehand. see the difference?!

but the sëx is relevant to her....
she went to bed with me on the premise that i am muslim! if i had told her the truth, she wouldn't have agreed to bed me! she only shägs muslims.

just like in this case - the wife wilfully had sëx with her husband but the husband conned her into believing he would withdraw. the husband did not force her to lie down there and take the spillage. she wouldn't have known he was spilling until after the act. no force was involved but deception!

doode: Yes i do have to insult them.
Ive been here a long time and i realize that you cannot convince a fool to understand logic. I would rather just insult him, so i can have a little fun while making him look like a bigger idiote.

the insults would not advance your points by a single jot. deal with the message, ignore the messenger.

@ mrbrownjay,
read my last post and answer.....

doode: What do you not understand about i dont care about you gender?

We are not women who have to tag-team on every issue to form an opinion. And i don't give a damn about any male outside my friends and family.

I am not defending men, and i dont expect every man to agree with me.

I am an defending the truth and common sense. The fact that you are a man and are defending this idiocy, doest bother me, it simply marks you as an idiot. Keep you mother, aunt, bla bla bla in your mouth, i dont care. I have a mother too.

T[b]he different between me and you is that i cant defend the logical side in every argument, while you are swayed by emotions. So keep barking like a dog, nothing will change the fact that you are defending a silly viewpoint[/b]

you don't need to resort to insults to drive your point.
i am completely comfortable with other people having a different opinion on this matter but i still think it's not räpe. consensual sex was agreed, if the man then changes his mind in the course of the sëxual congress, then it cannot amount to räpe. this woman didn't even say no when the husband decided to change his mind. she's just relying on what was agreed before the sex. the case should be thrown out!

MRbrownJAY: bro this is se.xual abuse if he did a sexual act that they had agreed NOT to do beforehand.

ra.pe/se.xual abuse.....different words, same meaning.

bwaaaah! how could it be consensual if the lady said that she did NOT want this.....focus on the word not. here you are giving the lady ways to fix the issue while the problem is not HOW to fix the issue, the problem is that she said she did not want to partake in a certain sexual act, and he did it against her wishes. how is that so difficult to understand?!

bro, the fact remain that wife or not, married or not, if a person does NOT want to partake in a specific sexual act, then nobody should ENFORCE that act on that particular person.

alimat: i can only sleep with a muslim, if you are not don't even bother.
coogar: i am a muslim, my second name is ibrahim

#coogar lied to get into bed with alimat

the next day, alimat discovered coogar had lied about his religion to cop a satisfying sex session with alimat, is coogar guilty of rapë?

MRbrownJAY: bro, as i said yesterday, YES she is not too smart about that fact, BUT, the "deal" was that the guy should NOT cuum inside her (i presume) and he did willfully and arrogantly saying that "he will do what he wants".

if this is the case, then it shouldn't be räpe, penetration was agreed, 1,000 thrusts before the ejaculatiön was agreed, the only disputable action was the few seconds of his spillage, how does that equate räpe?

so lets think very carefully about the issue:
- wifey says she does not want to be pregnant and that hubby should not cuum inside her
- he agrees and they start having sex
- then suddenly hubby changes his mind and cuum inside her AGAINST HER EARLIER WISHES, telling her that he will do what he want.......

it's still not räpe, another name should be coined for this.
consensual sex is consensual sex. everything up to the point of ejaculatiön went as agreed and planned. räpe is forced sex(from penetration till the end of the sëxual congress)!

and you guys have the audacity to say that it was CONSENSUAL?!

very consensual!
the woman could have used morning after pills after the act. they were both culpable for having unprotected sex to start with - which we both agreed could still have gotten her pregnant! how many men even have the willpower to withdraw completely once they reach that dizzying height?

bro, the mockery of ra.pe is when some guys believe that they can do what they want with a woman sexually, just because they want to. unless the two party are ok with WHATEVER act they indulge in, it can only be ra.pe (or at least abuse).

she was his wife - he has the legal rights to sleëp with her and complete his civic duties. on this occasion, the woman wanted him to withdraw - the dude did not. so you want to claim the few seconds of emission is the thin line between consensual sex and rapë?

elampiro: Agreed. Nani is the only winger who can beat his marker, and he does it with ease. I think SAF non encouragement of him is making him not to play freely, thereby resulting in some small errors. If he were the one that was through, he would have since been lost- off the sight of his markers. Valencia improved so much, but his final balls were not so perfect, although he gave the crosses. Giggs has the best final balls among the winger, I think that's why SAF keep playing him, but he was not needed today. Anderson did very well. Consistency has always been his problem. This is the time SAF should give Nani and Anderson games to see what possibly they will be doing in the future.

i am not even sure giggs has the best final ball - he's a hit n miss player.
under no circumstances should jones/giggs be starting ahead of cleverley and anderson in the midfield. we lose a lot of urgency in the midfield with those quacks.

valencia did not improve one jot - he had the pace and the power to bully gibbs but he kept hesitating. SAF is a complete idiöt when it comes to substitution. he should have taken out jones and rooney for anderson and hernandez respectively in the 70th minute. giggs had no business on the pitch today. he stank the whole joint and wasted the best chance in the game.

MRbrownJAY: bro, if a man has sex with a woman and tells her he doesnt want her to stick a finger up his butt, and she does in the heat of passion, then thats equally sexual abuse......but you certainly cannot dismiss what a person wants in the bedroom, simply because this is something you like/desire.

absolutely, i cannot dismiss what the other party wants.
however, a woman who had unprotected sex with her husband on the premise that he would not spill his seeds and then claims to have been räped is a lunatic!

even if the guy had withdrawn as agreed, she could still have gotten pregnant and cases such as this would set a bad precedent.

it simply means i could be guilty of räpe simply for not calling my bedmate the morning after. like i said earlier, this case makes a mockery of the real räpe victims.

elampiro: Nani substituted late. He was not happy even as Ferguson shook him.

stüpid decision - it could have been nani through on goal at the death when giggsy's snailspeed allowed arsenal defenders to catch up before wasting the chance. giggs' first touch was useless and his finish was horrible.

nani is our best winger - he's the only winger we have at the moment that can beat his marker. valencia should have been taken off instead of nani. anderson was also impressive when he came on. he brought some urgency to the immobile midfield. we could have easily won that game had fergie been smarter with his subs.

#MUFC Team:

De Gea,

Rafael, Evans, Rio, Evra,

Valencia, Carrick, Jones, Nani,

Rooney, RVP

Subs - Lindegaard, Buttner, Anderson, Giggs, Cleverley, Kagawa and Hernandez

she actually adopted the kids - no wonder she was so brutal to cause GBH. what a shame!!!

dayokanu: This came out after they beat Madrid, this was the same madrid they beat in October you toad.

by what margin, you tool?

They won Madrid in October due to brilliance they beat the same Madrid in April but this time it was due to fatique. LOL Have you seen how stupiddd you sound?

they beat madrid in dortmund 2-1. there was nothing in that. a goal margin is nothing. they beat madrid 4-1 last week. if the score was 2-1 like in october, people would be saying madrid are favourites. use your head for once and stop thinking like a castrated 3-legged goat.

Originalsly: In which West kid leashes is very popular? You leash your child like the two fools in your pic ...people would be angry with you for treating your child like a dog.@Poster...I guess that's the best she can do under the circumstances.

people would be angry at who? are you high on cheap amphetamines? kid leashes are sold legally in departmental stores to control kids in crowded areas and you are spewing gibberish. when next you see a leashed kid, go and get angry with parent and let's see if you won't come out with a bloodied nose.

[quote author=Mr_TA]Championes Championes OLE! OLE! OLE! [/quote]you are still celebrating?

dademola: aha!! U're being decieved by our defensive displays at totenham and madrid, i tell u.for barca to hav rubbished us soo sooo badly in a UCL final( a final,where u're expected to b compact and organised, especially if u're d underdog.. for crying out loud), dnt put anything past man utd.gone r d daiz of ferdinand/vidic and VDS saving our arses, and maybe scholes coming on in d 2nd half to 'calm things down'. I still maintain dt, it clda been us, believe me!! All dt is nided is a tactical goof by fergie. We all knw dt, at dis stage in d UCL, any grave tactical error by a coach, d opponent punishes d team severely

united would beat barcelona in a home/away fixture debarring any ridiculous decision by a match official. united were coasting to victory until nani got sent off against madrid. they were coasting to victory in 2010 too until rafael got sent off. there's no team in europe that can beat united 4-0 or 4-1. we are a counterattacking team away from home. 7 players must always be behind the ball.

dademola: bt serzly, r u guys saying dt dis present man utd side cldnt have suffered d same fate as madrid and barca?? Is it dt u feel we r betta dan dis 2 teams, or fergie wld hav got his tactics spot on, or that d present squad is betta dan dt 2007 manutd squad??

never, united don't leave themselves open away from home to concede 4-0 or 4-1. fergie keeps it tight away from home and even if we lose, it wouldn't have been more than by a goal margin.

dayokanu: The games won in October were due to their brilliance, So what stopped them from winning with the same brilliance in March?

it's not about dortmund you fool, it's about the teams they are playing against. the teams they are playing against after february are fatigued.

dayokanu: ^^ And the tool is back
Winter break was what made Dortmund beat teams in Spring like they were doing in autumn

Whats the difference in performance of Dortmund in September-October and in march April?

what an odious baboon!
how many points below bayern were dortmund in sep-oct? how many points below bayern are dortmund in march-april?

as at sep-october, there's no advantage cos every team in europe rested in the summer. the games dortmund won then were down to their brilliance. after february, dortmund had the benefit of the winter break to even do more damage than their counterparts in spain and worse still, england!

if you still cannot understand this then you should be set ablazed, crucified or both!

MRbrownJAY: ^^^you would be guilty of not delivering on your side of the deal, and that has nothing to do with ra.pe.......but you would still be in the wrong. if that act is punishable by law then technically your partner "could" take you to court.

why is there so much emphasis on what the woman wants? what about what the man wants? the article said a man can be guilty of räpe even if the sex is consensual.....shouldn't it be either party can be guilty of räpe?

MRbrownJAY: ^^^^bwaaaah, man you are taking it too far. they both did something wrong while the man added some more wrongful act into the mix.

really?
i would be guilty of räpe if i told my wife i would make her reach orgäsm but then failed to take her to the promised land?

sholay is the best indian movie ever made!

MRbrownJAY: there are different degrees and not just ra.pe....but also abuse, groping, humiliation or anything that the person is not cool with, that she let the guy know about prior to the showdown.

they should just declare being male is a criminal offence!

SailorXY: milan were easily the team to beat @ the said time... plus United was a very young team *the peak period of the transition*... given the circumstances, u cant really term it a disgrace bro

the defence was a joke on the night too...... oshea, brown and heinze. vidic was also rushed to make the 2nd leg tie. that united team was unhinged by injuries. united have learnt from that experience and they have not looked back since then.

sephia: If Zenith wins the CL, its the winter break, if they don't then they ain't a top team. Typical coogar, always speaking from both sides of the mouth.

it's a combination of both.....
you have to be stùpid to think a month's break is not advantageous in the middle of the season. i am sure you plonkers would also argue the concept of half time does not make any difference in football games.

if team A plays football for 90 mins without half time and team B plays 45 mins, go on break for 15 mins and then resume and play for another 45 mins, the performance level would be the same?

majority of you tools should never be allowed to discuss the weather, let alone the dynamics of football. alex ferguson is not stüpid for wanting the winter break. he knows it's going to benefit english clubs in europe!

pleep: If a woman told you not to touch her boobs during sex, and you do, will that be considered rape too?

ring up your solicitor to draft a pre-sex agreement.
anything that disappoints/angers your woman during sëx is now räpe. so if you fart during sex and she's disappointed then you are a rapïst!

[quote author=Royal^Pearl^]Any woman that does that is very wrong and if the guy refuses the child or does not want to pay child support then he surely has a right to do so. But there is a difference here. This situation is different because they lady asked her husband to stop and he said "he will do what he wants'. He had no regards for her and thought that since she is his wife, he can do whatever he wants. Reporting him for molestation is harsh and extreme seeing he is her husband but it was also harsh on him seeing that it was his wife, i guess she was probably fed up.[/quote]the situation is not different - deception is deception. as long as the terms and conditions made before the sex are broken, then it's räpe as well!

our judges have lost the plot completely. the society has become so anti-male and yet women wonder why men are no longer interested in marriage.

MRbrownJAY: no Bro, but the judge looked at the fact that the guy didnt pull out, thus not sticking to the agreement they had in place. so even if she didnt get pregnant, the guy still did something wrong and would have been "punished" by the court.

to me, this is just the same if a man tells his wife he doesnt want a child, she says she is on the pill, then she stops taking the pill and gets pregnant......deceit!

exactly what i told royal pearl!
the decision is ridiculous.....during intercourse, a woman decides to change position from döggy to missionary. husband says "no, i am your husband and i want döggy".

verdict: the husband has räped her!

[quote author=Royal^Pearl^]Are we talking abt the same article because the one i read is different to what you are saying now [/quote]of course, we are talking about the same article.
this man would be going to jail because he did not stick to the agreement before the sex and you agree he's wrong. now i am asking you if a woman is also guilty of räpe if she lies to her partner she's on the pill to make him have unprotected sex with her just to get pregnant?

this decision is an insult to the real rapë victims!