Are modern audiences too offended by Pussy Galore?

Tools    





We all listen to Death Metal
I often thought you were arguing with me only for you to tell me later you weren't, even though you were replying to specific things and they sounded like contradictions.
I think that's common enough though. I've always felt we've maintained mutual respect and taken the time to listen to each other and work through our misunderstandings. But every time this guy misunderstands me, he acts in this narsicistic way like it couldn't possibly be a misunderstanding on his part. That and just flat out denying what's right in front of him.



I think that's common enough though. I've always felt we've maintained mutual respect and taken the time to listen to each other and work through our misunderstandings. But every time this guy misunderstands me, he acts in this narsicistic way like it couldn't possibly be a misunderstanding on his part. That and just flat out denying what's right in front of him.
I want to say something in favor of Jabs...
While I disagree with his view point, I do believe that he totally believes in what he's saying. I don't feel he's taking a different viewpoint just for the sake of pissing people off. Yes he could be less defense, but I think he's posting out of a firm belief.



Agreed, I think you're both being genuine and that means there's a significant disconnect. I have no opinion out how or why or whose fault it is, but I feel pretty confident neither of you are crazy and there's at least some level of misunderstanding going on.
__________________



Also answers to Jabba
The whole topic has mutated to something quite different at this point. Zotis and I obviously disagree on basic things as what constitutes sex and consent, so trying to find common ground on an example being classified as rape is a near impossible task.

Then there is this quote from him which was mostly passed over:
Originally Posted by Zotis
I would call the example you gave Sexual Assault. I would make an omission though. Instead of forcing me to give them rim jobs, I would say try to. Because your example implies that I gave in, but I would exert every fiber of my being unto death to not give in to that. Even with a gun to my head it is still my choice and my act of will to extend my tongue and lick or take a bullet. That is my conviction. Either way, I don't consider it rape.
Which means that a person holding a knife to your throat to get oral sex is never going to rape you, but only either sexually assault you or murder you, because according to your theory, you either open your mouth "by your choice and act of will" which then somehow makes it not rape (dare I even go as far as say you would call this consensual?) or he will just kill you.

I think this sort of reasoning is beyond flawed, it definitely makes a claim for the characterization of ignorant and is disrespectful to many victims out there because at best it implies they didn't try to resist enough, at worst it makes the whole act consensual.



The above example he listed is a Reductio ad absurdem anyways.
I resisted posting but I must say there is nothing further to be gained here if the argument is splitting hairs over what constitutes as rape.
And I say this as someone who once stopped one in progress before he made any penetration, but that didn’t stop the girl in question from being upset over it once she regained her senses. (She was drunk and passed out)



Also answers to Jabba
The above example he listed is a Reductio ad absurdem anyways.
Reductio ad absurdum means I took Zotis' argument to ridiculous situations. I merely applied his logic moving the target area literally a few centimeters.



The above example he listed is a Reductio ad absurdem anyways.
Reductio ad absurdum means I took Zotis' argument to ridiculous situations. I merely applied his logic moving the target area literally a few centimeters.
I was referring to his actually.
Sorry, I realized I didn’t make that clear



Well I think that some fans are just blowing it out of proportion, not just of this scene, but also the way Bond treats women in other movies as well. Even in Diamonds are Forever, people complain about how Bond chokes a woman for information. But I feel like saying they are movies, and we are not suppose to take them as serious testament to real life...



We all listen to Death Metal
Originally Posted by Zotis
Even with a gun to my head it is still my choice and my act of will to extend my tongue and lick or take a bullet.
Which means that a person holding a knife to your throat to get oral sex is never going to rape you, but only either sexually assault you or murder you, because according to your theory, you either open your mouth "by your choice and act of will" which then somehow makes it not rape (dare I even go as far as say you would call this consensual?) or he will just kill you.

I think this sort of reasoning is beyond flawed.
I think you should have waited to hear my actual argument before you made one up for me that was "beyond flawed."

If they hold a knife to your throat and say open up, it is your act of will if you comply. But it's not consent if you don't to save your life. It's coercion. Calling it rape is stricter than the other examples, but still not in the strictest sense since the mouth isn't a sex organ. It's only consent if the victim stops resisting and starts embracing and enjoying it. It's still wrong to force yourself onto someone like that even if it does eventually become consensual.

An example of this kind of scenario not resulting in rape is the ice pic scene in Shawshank Redemption where Andy resists with every fiber of his being to the very end.



mattiasflgrtll6's Avatar
The truth is in here
No, it's never consent if the victim was forced into sex in the first place. That the victim "starts enjoying it" doesn't matter. Even if someone starts enjoying it on a physical level eventually, it will still most likely traumatize you since you didn't agree to it.



mattiasflgrtll6's Avatar
The truth is in here
And please stop acting like a sexual organ penetrating an intimate area is the necessary criteria to count as rape. Does that mean lesbian rape doesn't even exist?



We all listen to Death Metal
The above example he listed is a Reductio ad absurdem anyways.
Reductio ad absurdum means I took Zotis' argument to ridiculous situations. I merely applied his logic moving the target area literally a few centimeters.
I was referring to his actually.
Sorry, I realized I didn’t make that clear
Yeah, I thought you were talking about Jabs, and I do think he very explicitly reduced my argument to something as absurd as calling being coerced at knife point to give a blow job consent.

Please tell me how I'm the one who reduced his argument to something absurd. I'm very curious.



I decided to reread some posts after you responded, to makes sure I didn’t miss anything nor mistakenly confused one posts for another. It seems to me you’re both being absurd.
I type this not as condemnation, however you‘re both So busy trying to one up each other with defining rape and your “what if” scenarios and both more concerned with being right rather then stopping to consider how much in poor taste it is.



We all listen to Death Metal
And please stop acting like a sexual organ penetrating an intimate area is the necessary criteria to count as rape.
Well, to be fair I'm saying that in the strictest sense. It's also pretty common to call getting beaten at a video game rape too in some circles.


Does that mean lesbian rape doesn't even exist?
In the strictest sense lesbians can't have sex at all period. They can only simulate it artificially or get each other off. But words have wide semantic ranges and are not restricted to their most literal sense.



We all listen to Death Metal
I decided to reread some posts after you responded, to makes sure I didn’t miss anything nor mistakenly confused one posts for another. It seems to me you’re both being absurd.
I had a feeling you used the latin term in pretense.