[Saya]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

As far as whether or not pregnancy is easy, I can only go but what I've seen. What I've seen is that every time my wife was pregnant, it was quite easy for her. In the end, though, she got a bit lucky, I guess. C-sections.

And what I've seen is women who can't wear pants anymore because their c-section scars still hurt.

It's up to the **** victim to prove that they were *****, regardless.

No its not, and thats an extremely hard thing to do.

I never said it would be easy. I know first-hand that it's not easy.

Unless you've given birth before you can't say you know first hand.

That's why children should be taught that if something happens, and they have no idea if it's bad or not, they should talk to an adult.

Way to oversimplify a complicated and horrible situation. Children are extremely suggestive and easily manipulated.

You know, I followed the sources that site claimed, and couldn't seem to locate any specific statistics about **** convictions. Maybe I missed it.

Follow number three in the footnote, sheesh.

I didn't mean to imply that women are lying about being ***** though that certainly would qualify as "even if they're innocent." I was thinking more along the lines of cases such as mistaken identity or circumstantial evidence.

Fair enough.

If someone forces their dick into you, you're going to have marks from forced entry. If you struggled, you'll probably have even more marks. If you were tied up, you'd have marks from that. The point is, there is almost always visible evidence of ****.

Not always the case, unless you're watching CSI. I'm not sure how many rapists tie up their victims, how many victims are completely conscious and fighting tooth and nail. You're focusing on a very specific **** scenario.

As for psychologically, you're right, different people react differently. But even then, criminal psychologists are trained to identify when a person is reacting to a ****.

Then the **** convicition rate wouldn't be so low if thats all it took,wouldn't it? If it were that simple, there'd be no false accusations, right? They can talk to a person and say "this person has had a traumatic experience, or this person is depressed," but no one can say "This person has been *****" purely by how they are acting. And like I said, a lot of people put up a good front and some people dont' react at all.

This would still result in the above-mentioned physical evidence.

Not always. You might find this interesting:
http://www.safercampus.org/blog/?p=1296

The whole "if you're drunk you were *****" bullshit is exactly that. Unless, of course, someone got someone else drunk just so they could fuck them. Beyond that, drunkeness does not equal non-consentual. If both parties were drunk, who ***** who?

Its if a sober person takes advantage of a drunk person, whether or not they intentionally got them drunk.

In this day and age, I'd be amazed if there were really that many people who didn't know that those things are not okay.

Its sad but actually, but think about it, its fairly recently in history that we consider these things ****. I hope we're getting better at getting **** education out there but its not the case, if you don't go looking for this info you might not ever know, except for your gut feeling that you were violated somehow.

Like I said above, they should be taught to go to an adult if they're not sure.

Like I said before, its just not that easy. And its not the kid's fault or the parent's fault if the kid doesn't come forward.

So they shouldn't try at all? They should just roll over and take it? You might as well say that they were asking for it.

I'm not saying they shouldn't try and don't try to turn this around on me, I'm saying its not that easy for them and its not their fault if they don't report it. I can't blame a victim for not coming forward, even though I would and have encouraged it, its not their fault that our system makes it extremely hard for them to get any justice.

What's fucking sick is that I say that **** victims should come forward, and you argue against it.

You're still the one who said its their fault if they didn't report it so no abortion, dude.

"Pro-choice and being okay with abortion are two very different things."

"Not everyone who is pro choice goes out every weekend and has an abortion."

Your statement doesn't match up with hers.

Again, I apologize for your lack of abstract thinking. Thats very sad you can't do that. I'll try to be absolutely literal in the future.

You're right, 18 years of responsibility and hard work is not comparable to 9 months of discomfort. Women are lucky.

Fuck you. Even with that argument, a woman has the 18 years of responsibility and hardwork AND has to carry the child and risk health complications and death and give birth. Really, fuck you.

As for "the lack of the right to choose," that's exactly what you're arguing for.

I'd vote against the right to choose to **** too, since its forcing someone to use their body for your wants.

Again, criminal psychologist. (And I don't mean the ones who talk to criminals, I mean the ones who help investigators determine if a criminal complaint is valid. I'm not sure if that's the proper term.)

Again, really, what magical world do you live in where every **** and abuse case can be proven sooooooo easily? CSI or Law And Order? Especially with these cases it can come down to a "he said she said" scenario.

And a woman should not have legal rights to deny a man his own rights.

There are no rights for her to deny.