Quote:

---

And Assault does not involve touching. Assault is a threat of Battery, Battery is the touching part. Sexual Assault has been defined to include touching or contact, but continues to not require it.- JSF

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

And Assault does not involve touching. Assault is a threat of Battery, Battery is the touching part. Sexual Assault has been defined to include touching or contact, but continues to not require it.- JSF

---

Not exactly. It depends on what state you live in. In CA, threatening someone is assault, touching someone is battery. But in other states, assault requires touching.

The sex crimes categories in CA are pretty confusing, some of them seem very specific, but what is a "lewd or lascivious act"? Sometimes the info lists a specific action like "oral copulation" ... doesn't that meet the definition of rape? but most times not.

These are examples from the registered sex offender map of my neighborhood

Annoy or molest a child under 18
Sexual penetration with foreign object with force or fear
Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (there were five of these)
Attempted lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (two of these)
Continuous sexual abuse of a child
Continuous sexual abuse of a child AND Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

And Assault does not involve touching. Assault is a threat of Battery, Battery is the touching part. Sexual Assault has been defined to include touching or contact, but continues to not require it.- JSF

---

Not exactly. It depends on what state you live in. In CA, threatening someone is assault, touching someone is battery. But in other states, assault requires touching.

The sex crimes categories in CA are pretty confusing, some of them seem very specific, but what is a "lewd or lascivious act"? Sometimes the info lists a specific action like "oral copulation" ... doesn't that meet the definition of rape? but most times not.

These are examples from the registered sex offender map of my neighborhood

Annoy or molest a child under 18
Sexual penetration with foreign object with force or fear
Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (there were five of these)
Attempted lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (two of these)
Continuous sexual abuse of a child
Continuous sexual abuse of a child AND Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14

---

Depending on the mood of the officer and the mood of the judge for the day, simply urinating outdoors even at two in the morning can put you on the sex offender map. Not something that anybody who could afford a decent lawyer would have to worry about, but it's a crap shoot if you've got a public defender. But that's just another small example of how people with no power or money get screwed.

Quote:

---

Nowhere does it say ... "Thought about having sex with someone"

---

.
Maybe the law doesn't say that. But when people quote a very flawed research study like Kiki did earlier and other people buy the stats, that's exactly what those particular people are saying.

Quote:

---

In this sampling, there wasn't even one instance of possession of pornography, which is the lowest classification offense you can have and still get on the sex offenders list.

---

And no doubt the most common of offenses. Makes you wonder the validity of the study when there's no mention of that at all.

Quote:

---

I was surprised at the number of offenders who abused children under 14.

Sexual assault seems to more about power than sex and the number of pedophiles was truly astounding. And BTW, all of the offenders were men.

---

Of course they were.

Quote:

---

Nobody is asking you, SIX, to apologize for something that you didn't do. Just like violent political action, I localize the crime to the person who committed it - I don't generalize that person's crime to anyone else.

---

I'm not really accusing you of doing so. Look at Wishy though. And even, to a lesser extent, Kiki. Sure, Kiki is usually much more tactful when talking about things, but you can see it in her posts as well.

Quote:

---

But when you say that you don't like being told what to do .... first of all, I assume that if you're a libertarian what you means is I don't like being told what to do as long as I;m not coercing anyone, and/or I'm only hurting myself.

---

Yep.

Quote:

---

But it's in the nature of people living together in a functional society that there will HAVE To be rules laid out, if only so that the strong don't prey on the weak. Because if you think that the answer for sexual assault is a good kick in the balls from the intended victim, what does a child do? Or an elderly person? Or someone who is mentally or physically disabled? The idea that there shouldn't be any rules - and nobody to enforce them- is a fantasy which only benefits the predators among us.

---

In this case I'm not really even talking about sexual crimes or the laws and punishments against them. I'm a Libertarian, not an Anarchist. Anarchy wouldn't work, simply because there are too many bad people for it to ever work. We need police and a prison system because we need for most people to have that thought in the back of their mind that there are real consequences to their actions. The fact that we have them and it still doesn't work all of the time is only evidence of how much we actually need that.

This was more a statement on my part about the entire nature of relationships between men and women and how in any relationship a woman holds all of the cards from the moment they have sex. She has 100% reproductive rights. Although the tides may be turning, historically, she has had access to half or more of the man's cash after a divorce depending on how many kids there are in the equation. She automatically is assumed to be the parent getting the children unless she has a long history of violent, abusive behavior. She gets the house while the guy has to rent an apartment.

I'm not making any of this up, and kids aren't stupid. They're picking up on it pretty quick these days. There was no internet when I was a kid. I can't even pretend to imagine how different things would have been in my life if there were.

I'm not shunning the laws of government in general. I'm saying the laws against men regarding relationships are bullshit and I choose to evade them by not getting into one.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Let's say that a woman silently removes a man's hand from her breast several times, but it keeps creeping back. Is that OK? What about if he keeps touching her crotch and she says "No"? What about if he grabs hard enough to leave bruises? Repeatedly rubs his crotch against her on the bus or in the subway? How about catcalls? Following her partway down the sidewalk making kissy noises?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I have never, ever, EVER in my life seen any of these things happen.
I'm fairly certain that in most cases if this were to happen in public, you'd have more than one man in the vicinity getting in the middle of it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
I see you can't be bothered to back up your assertions with anything related to the actual in the real world.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
As to your videos, Kiki. you don't want me to start posting videos of Feminists at college. I will, if you want to keep posting vids and we can see who's dick is bigger.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
As to your videos, Kiki. you don't want me to start posting videos of Feminists at college. I will, if you want to keep posting vids and we can see who's dick is bigger.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Yes, SIX, please, by all means post those videos. Because I doubt that you'll find any daily-life on-the-street harassment of men by women; but feel free to educate me.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

---

Quote:

---

kiki
And IF YOU READ THE PAPER, you'll see that there is a large body of studies that have been carried out over the years that come up with similar numbers. Do you reject ALL the studies? Is that where you're going in how you deal with facts?

---

Quote:

---

jack
Right. As I said, it was a bullshit study.

---

Quote:

---

jack
I don't buy polling data when they randomly sample a few thousand out of 300,000 million people, but at least they're using ALL of the data.

---

Quote:

---

jack
but who was there to oversee the "randomization" process?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Oonjerah:
Men -vs- Women: Sexual assault.

  Some men are gentlemen and very protective of women.
I have no idea what percentage of men enjoy sexually assaulting women.
I hope the number is less than 20%; but in real life, and when alcohol
is involved, I suspect it's closer to 35%.

  6IX, for you to repeatedly post so defensively ... you act like the
survey is pointing the finger at You! Get a grip, please!

  I was suddenly groped by an acquaintance about a year ago ... it came
as a complete surprise as he'd always seemed pretty straight arrow.
It was uncalled for, disgusting, & I've avoided him ever since.

  The survey is pointing the finger at men who DO sexually assault women.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

---

Quote:

---

The scope and the pervasiveness of this culture of abuse and our roles in perpetuating it—and not “our” as in men collectively but ourselves specifically—has resulted recently in a reflexive and unwieldy and messy and self-conscious excavation of memories, relationships and interactions: a digging that has intersecting intents. It’s reconciling with what you might have done—and might currently be doing—to prevent yourself from doing it in the future. And, well, it’s asking yourself, “How fucked up am I?” Which, expressed another way, is “Wait ... should I be worried about this avalanche, too?”

The answer, of course, is hell fucking yes. We are all complicit. We are all agents of patriarchy, and we’ve all benefited from it. We are all active contributors to rape culture. All of us. No one is exempt. We all have investments in and take deposits out of the same bank. And we all need to accept and reconcile ourselves with the fact that, generally speaking, we are trash.

---

Quote:

---

Wait, I think I get it. Calling yourself trash is how men deal with the fact that they actually like patriarchy and misogyny because it benefits them. So they show shame and that covers up for the fact that they still want dominance. If you say “I’m trash” and do a little performative feminism, you can avoid changing the status quo and get credit at the same time. That’s what this is, right? Just like wypipo who come on here and performatively flog themselves as a last ditch effort to maintain dominance and still look like the good guy at the same time.

“I’m a man and I’m trash” keeps you in a superior position. You’re the bad guy who acts. You’re the agent. You have the power, you are the center of the discussion. Look at you, flogging yourself. You can decide to not be trash but it is all about you and your agency and you create reality. Right now reality is the spectacle of you calling yourself trash. No status quo change needed in this narcissistic shame show. Status quo change would require that you first STFU.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Let's grant that men are discriminated against in matter of family law (marriage and children), which seems to be your big main beef. (BTW, none of which you've had experience with, or are likely to ever experience, given your attitude.)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

kiki
And IF YOU READ THE PAPER, you'll see that there is a large body of studies that have been carried out over the years that come up with similar numbers. Do you reject ALL the studies? Is that where you're going in how you deal with facts?

---

Quote:

---

jack
Right. As I said, it was a bullshit study.

---

When you can't come up with a reasonable thought based on actual facts, is that your go-to response?

Quote:

---

jack
I don't buy polling data when they randomly sample a few thousand out of 300,000 million people, but at least they're using ALL of the data.

---

They're not trying to represent 300 million people. Not 150 million, or even 30 million. They're representing somewhat less than 9 million male full or 3/4 time college students 18-25.

Quote:

---

jack
but who was there to oversee the "randomization" process?

---

It's computer-driven. Apparently you have no idea about statistics - what the fundamental ideas are, the mathematics used, how it's carried out.

This PARTICULAR study is notable partly because it experimented with web-based surveying, rather than proctored/ administered surveying. Apparently people are more forthcoming when dealing with a computer than when in the presence of, or directly interacting with, another person, or persons.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
one from the south and one from the upper midwest

but colleges get their students from all over the US

---

Quote:

---

Speak for yourself and keep your projections the hell away from me, you virtue signalling, college-brainwashed, Regressionist Liberal, sad-sack apologist twat. Go fuck yourself, Mr. Young.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
KIKI knows someone who was raped.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
I suspect every woman who posts here has had at least one notable instance of being victimized by a man because she's a woman.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Oonjerah:

That's probably True.

I don't believe that men, in general, are violent pigs.
I think most are decent.
But sooner or later, you're gonna meet a violent pig.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

---

I believe that that is an insult to pigs. Pigs is just being pigs. And pigs is tasty.

==============================

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Anyway ... to go sideways a bit to the title

I think the McCarthy era was a low point. The Vietnam War was pretty low, too. Watergate was low, as was the time Nixon was deeply drunk and ready to drop "the bomb" on Vietnam. The petro-dollar arrangement was also low. In retrospect, Clinton's dismantling of the productive American economy was low. The explosive expansion of the surveillance state under "W" Bush was also low. As was Obama's drone-assassination program.

It's be hard to pick what was lowest.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Oonjerah:
JSF, "I don't remember the McCarthy era."

Rampant paranoia about the Communist party &
its increasing membership here in the USA.

Wikipedia:
"McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of subversion or treason
without proper regard for evidence. The term refers to U.S. Senator Joseph
McCarthy and has its origins in the period in the United States known as
the Second Red Scare, lasting roughly from 1947 to 1956 and characterized
by heightened political repression as well as a campaign spreading fear of
Communist influence on American institutions and of espionage by Soviet
agents."

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

I admit, my sampling of 'women' is limited. I've interacted with perhaps a dozen waitresses at length at my local diner over the last 25 years. Then there's the Hispanic neighbor-lady that lives on one side. (The other side is a rental, and lately the renters have been flowing thru at roughly yearly intervals.) Then there's my mom, grandmother, aunts, all my cousins, and assorted female relatives. And the three or so dozen co-workers. All the students I've trained over the years. Professors. And so on.
Most women I know don't call themselves feminists any more than they call themselves vertebrates, because the name just doesn't matter to them that much, one way or the other.
But if you ask them, what they want is to be treated fairly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
So far, best year I've seen since Reagan.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:

the Senile old shit and shape shifter Commiefornia Democrat who invited Afghan islamists into the Whitehouse...ok

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:

the Senile old shit and shape shifter Commiefornia Democrat who invited Afghan islamists into the Whitehouse...ok

---

Jaynzetown, do you realize this thread has been dead since 2017, you crazy old crank?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

Running theory: Jaynestown is a socket puppet who spams the board every morning and throughout the day to keep Russian posts buried.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:
to keep Russian posts buried.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:


“All people are insane (in Viking movies). They will do anything at any time, and God help anybody who looks for reasons.” - paraphrasing Kurt Vonnegut

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:
to keep Russian posts buried.

---

Then why have I been bumping the Russian thread
http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=64889
saying Putin is the aggressive invader and they are going to have massive loss and young broken men in Ukraine

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:


But it all depends on their attitude toward expedition deaths during the heroic age of Antarctic exploration.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
God help anybody who looks for reasons.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

I hope Donald Trump or Ted Cruz wins the nomination and the party is crushed as Barry Goldwater was in 1964.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:
Joe's approval sinks to 22% among young adults, 24% among Hispanics: poll

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:
Joe's approval sinks to 22% among young adults, 24% among Hispanics: poll

---

What poll? NM - in the last decade we should have learned that early polling is irrelevant and only used to fill “white space” and catch eyeballs.

I don’t know why you bump any thread JT - you seem to bump every thread or have no pattern.

---

Quote:

---

Democrats will be lucky if the party even survives until 2030.

---