College Women: Stop Getting Drunk

[PoliticalNick]

And no, it's not a double standard. Men who suspect they have been violated in some manner can also report it to the police.

Of course they can, they are just a whole lot less likely to do it.

The double standard that seems to be the sticking point here though is the difference in responsibility when people get themselves intoxicated. It appears that an intoxicated woman has no responsibility for her actions whereas an intoxicated male is totally responsible for his actions and according to some on here her actions also. It is hard to establish gender equality with such a double standard as the prevalent opinion in society.

I don't do anything of those things. I just get a woman to do them for me, even if it means paying the minimum wage to some 18-year-old, big-breasted, blonde bimbo to do them for me. I'm a man and I don't do women's jobs.

Please grow a set of balls. Real men actually cook & clean and do household chores. We change diapers and feed the kids and take our turn in the minivan as a soccer-mom. You are a disgrace to males and it would be nice if you just quit now before someone thinks you are an example of what a man really is.

 

[karrie]

Of course they can, they are just a whole lot less likely to do it.

The double standard that seems to be the sticking point here though is the difference in responsibility when people get themselves intoxicated. It appears that an intoxicated woman has no responsibility for her actions whereas an intoxicated male is totally responsible for his actions and according to some on here her actions also. It is hard to establish gender equality with such a double standard as the prevalent opinion in society.

It's not a double standard, it's a discrepancy in application by individuals. You can't make men and women view sex the same, no matter how much you bang the equality drum. That doesn't negate the right of women to report.

 

[PoliticalNick]

It's not a double standard, it's a discrepancy in application by individuals. You can't make men and women view sex the same, no matter how much you bang the equality drum. That doesn't negate the right of women to report.

I am not negating the right to report they believe they were raped. They can report til the cows come home and a dozen blue moons go by. They just shouldn't expect much to come of it if they got themselves intoxicated to the point of not having a clear memory of what really happened.

 

[tober]

No. Colpy is more apt to argue the law as it is in the books whereas Gerry argues his personal beliefs should be the law. I may not always agree with Colpy but I do respect him....Gerry on tbe other hand....

Funny, all I see Colpy do is get mad, call names and argue facts that don't address the argument. He then presumes that because his facts were correct his argument must be right. His sense of logic and sticking to the point under debate is dismal. He is what he describes himself to be - too angry to make sense.

It's not a double standard, it's a discrepancy in application by individuals. You can't make men and women view sex the same, no matter how much you bang the equality drum. That doesn't negate the right of women to report.

Quit trying to manufacture a red herring.

The issue is that in the circumstances nick is describing the evidence just isn't there. You are abandoning logic for ideology.

 

[gerryh]

I am not negating the right to report they believe they were raped. They can report til the cows come home and a dozen blue moons go by. They just shouldn't expect much to come of it if they got themselves intoxicated to the point of not having a clear memory of what really happened.

and if they are that intoxicated, then they can't give informed consent, and it is rape.

 

[tober]

and if they are that intoxicated, then they can't give informed consent, and it is rape.

Define "that intoxicated"?

If she can't remember, then she was beyond the point of being able to give consent. That makes it rape. You, however seem to enjoy wanting to give the guy an out by saying that if she was that far gone and she can't remember, then it isn't rape.

By your interpretation all that has to happen for a man to be guilty of rape is for a woman to say, "I can't remember." Since sexual assault can be prosecuted by indictment there is no time limit. Any woman any time can point to any man she is angry with and call rape based on 'I don't remember'. As has been said on this thread earlier, there is no way to look at some people and know how drunk they are. You are setting up a political crime prosecutable by any of Canada's many radical misandrist feminists.

 

[gerryh]

Define "that intoxicated"?



By your interpretation all that has to happen for a man to be guilty of rape is for a woman to say, "I can't remember." Since sexual assault can be prosecuted by indictment there is no time limit. Any woman any time can point to any man she is angry with and call rape based on 'I don't remember'. As has been said on this thread earlier, there is no way to look at some people and know how drunk they are. You are setting up a political crime prosecutable by any of Canada's many radical misandrist feminists.

Then don't have sex with them......... or are you unable to control your base urges?

 

[tober]

The fact that the OP makes the same knee jerk reaction about the article doesn't disprove my point.

And no, it's not a double standard. Men who suspect they have been violated in some manner can also report it to the police.

There you go changing the subject again. You and I are discussing the question of misandry in this thread. Whether or not men can complain to authorities is irrelevant to whether your input was misandrist. The OP topic is whether there is a double standard against men. You want to derail that by emotionally accusing men of disrespecting rape victims. Since no one man or example is under discussion, your attack is on "men". You might not think you were being misandrist. Most men don't think they are being misogynist when women accuse them. Yet another double standard. Your posts are misandrist.

LMAO. Textbook. Absolutely textbook. It's amazing.

Good fishing Blackleaf. Do you consider that a nibble or a full bite?

 

[CDNBear]

Come on by my place and say what you want to my face and see what happens.

No. Colpy is more apt to argue the law as it is in the books whereas Gerry argues his personal beliefs should be the law.

Seriously, stop embarrassing yourself, I'm starting to feel bad for you.

 

[SLM]

T
Good fishing Blackleaf. Do you consider that a nibble or a full bite?

OMFG, you think he was joking? Now that's hilarious and yet more proof positive that you're unable to see what's right in front of your eyes.

 

[tober]

Quote: Originally Posted by tober

Define "that intoxicated"?

By your interpretation all that has to happen for a man to be guilty of rape is for a woman to say, "I can't remember." Since sexual assault can be prosecuted by indictment there is no time limit. Any woman any time can point to any man she is angry with and call rape based on 'I don't remember'. As has been said on this thread earlier, there is no way to look at some people and know how drunk they are. You are setting up a political crime prosecutable by any of Canada's many radical misandrist feminists.
​

Then don't have sex with them......... or are you unable to control your base urges?

"Base urges?" Have we offended your puritanical soul? Imagine that you meet a pleasant and charming woman who has been drinking but doesn't appear looped. When she indicates that a relationship with her is possible, you are going to say not until she sobers up? You sound like an ideologue whose never been laid. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

 

[gerryh]

"Base urges?" Have we offended your puritanical soul? Imagine that you meet a pleasant and charming woman who has been drinking but doesn't appear looped. When she indicates that a relationship with her is possible, you are going to say not until she sobers up? You sound like an ideologue whose never been laid. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

Yup, stupidity runs rampant in your household.

 

[tober]

OMFG, you think he was joking? Now that's hilarious and yet more proof positive that you're unable to see what's right in front of your eyes.

Well if it isn't the little princess? Maybe you can answer the question - did you offer Blackleaf a wee nibble or a full bite?

 

[SLM]

Yup, stupidity runs rampant in your household.

[/FONT]

Well.....
...he's certainly proven he can't read people.

Well if it isn't the little princess? Maybe you can answer the question - did you offer Blackleaf a wee nibble or a full bite?

I also take him to be about 12.

 

[tober]

Quote: Originally Posted by tober

"Base urges?" Have we offended your puritanical soul? Imagine that you meet a pleasant and charming woman who has been drinking but doesn't appear looped. When she indicates that a relationship with her is possible, you are going to say not until she sobers up? You sound like an ideologue whose never been laid.
WWWWWWWWWWWWW

​

Yup, stupidity runs rampant in your household.

Too embarrassed to answer the question? Probably, because you painted yourself into a foolish corner. Or maybe you're just an uptight puritan?

 

[CDNBear]

Seriously tuber, are you really this daft or just pretending?

There seems to be a serious issue with people pretending to be dropping bait around here, only to embarrassing themselves badly in the process.

 

[gerryh]

Quote: Originally Posted by tober

"Base urges?" Have we offended your puritanical soul? Imagine that you meet a pleasant and charming woman who has been drinking but doesn't appear looped. When she indicates that a relationship with her is possible, you are going to say not until she sobers up? You sound like an ideologue whose never been laid. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

​

Too embarrassed to answer the question? Probably, because you painted yourself into a foolish corner.

The answer is obvious for anyone with half a working brain cell, something that you and nick obviously lack. If you are concerned about appropriate consent, then don't have sex with her at that time. If you aren't 100% sure that she is sober enough to give concent, then don't have sex with her. If NOT having sex with her is a deal breaker when it comes to a possible relationship, then it's probably not a relationship one should be getting into. Common sense as far as I am concerned.

 

[tober]

Well.....
...he's certainly proven he can't read people.

I think this is the second or third time you've said this. This is a place where words debate. The gender card isn't as effective here. Do I offend you? If so that is your problem not mine. I'm just debating, and I recognize no sacred cows.

I also take him to be about 12.

Sacred cow?

 

[CDNBear]

The answer is obvious for anyone with half a working brain cell, something that you and nick obviously lack. If you are concerned about appropriate consent, then don't have sex with her at that time. If you aren't 100% sure that she is sober enough to give concent, then don't have sex with her. If NOT having sex with her is a deal breaker when it comes to a possible relationship, then it's probably not a relationship one should be getting into. Common sense as far as I am concerned.

That was a waste of effort.

I'm just debating...

Is that what you think you do?

... and I recognize no sacred cows.

You don't recognize much.

 

[SLM]

I think this is the second or third time you've said this. This is a place where words debate. The gender card isn't as effective here. Do I offend you? If so that is your problem not mine. I'm just debating, and I recognize no sacred cows.

Where have I offered up a gender card? Oh do you mean when you retorted to me by calling me "princess"? That would by you then.

Sacred cow?

Merely noting your immaturity.