/fem/ - Female

Goddamn, I feel bad for all the men that'll get their lives ruined by crazy bitches that'll lie about rape if they're mad at him or regret it. People get too fucking worked up about rape, I feel like in some cases it might be more damaging to get all the repercussions of being accused and charged falsely for it than to actually get raped. Fucking feminists, give the men a break.

>>51538
Please don't be in London.

Good Job Britain.

I like this whole non-violent suicide of a nation thing you've go going.

Not being allowed to have sex with a British woman is like not being allowed to stick a fork in an electrical outlet.

>>51556
Thanks I guess…

I can't believe I forgot to remove my name again.

I try not to post on most other boards with my name if it's not /pol/ relevant-but even in this case I wasn't wanting to use my name around here specifically.

Oh well, whatever.

>>51521
you can just accuse the guy of making "revenge porn"

>>51426
So basically they want all men to record their sexual encounters?

It's not like I was ever gonna get to have sex any ways.

People wonder why there are so many betas and why men don't approach like they once did. It's because many a scared of having a bitch use laws like this to fuck their entire lives.

So what do you think is the next step?

Seriously, we all know it's not going to stop here, but this is pretty fucking insane. This is basically "Guilty until proven innocent" already. But that's not going to be enough. It will never be enough.

If you want my guess, these will be the next steps:

1. "Yes doesn't always mean yes," women will be able to accuse men even if they said yes at the time by rescinding consent later, it will be up to men to prove that they did not show subtle "signs of distress" during sex, such as squirming or moaning

2. "For your own good" women are obviously incapable of communicating whether or not they've been raped, so now any sexual conduct that seems questionable will be reviewed by legal authorities to determine whether or not the woman actually did consent or not. This will help uphold community standards when it comes to sex

3. "Endgame," the "legal authorities" reviewing whether sex was consensual or not are replaced, overtly or covertly, with councils of radical feminists

Its going to be like a middle school dance on a massive scale, with the boys all on one side and the girls on the other, with the chaperones watching the one pair actually dancing to make sure they "leave room for Jesus".

Meanwhile sandkips rape 1000+ kids and it gets covered up. Eventually there's going to be an equilibrium where dating someone is as likely to get you locked up as raping them.

>>52205

If everyone goes out and rapes, is it really rape?

everyone has a phone, just use the voice capture app

>do you consent to having your voice captured
>yes
>do you want to fuck
>yes
>lets get to it!

this is the future of sex folks….

>>51850
The "Yes doesn't always mean yes" thing has been creeping into effect for a while. Prenups are thrown out, even if the wife willingly signed it, just by saying that they were under emotional stress at the time.

You get a girl who claims rape, the guy brings the contract proving she consented, and all she has to do is say she was stressed and pressured into signing it. Now your ass is getting raped daily by your cellmate.

>>52509
Yes, yes there's a tendency for pushes to fix a legal problem leading to rather extreme and unfair measures. And I'm concerned by radicals pushing feminist extremism (or really many kinds of extremeism) into law, especially when there is very little push back to defend the victims of those measures.

And there's good evidence and arguments to be made that men are treated poorly by the courts from alimony, to rights to their children, to being given less mercy and leniency than women.

That said there are valid arguments to be made for some of those things… sooooometimes. And they're arguments, not necessarily things we should assume are always true. It's totally possible that someone could coerce you into signing a contract (but then why wouldn't you hasten to have it thrown out right away like you normally do in contract law?). The thing is that someone CLAIMING they were coerced into agreeing is not solid proof that they really were coerced. It's just a claim that they need to back up with evidence.

Prenups, at least in Canada, sometimes get thrown out for the reason that one party did not get any legal advice. We also have a concept here where if your contract has unusual terms you have to get the person agreeing to sign or initial on each of those terms to make sure they know what odd things they're agreeing to.

>>52525

I think the problem is that we have only a binary understanding of consent, it's either "Perfect, I understand everything and accept perfect responsibility for all future consequence, I am enthusiastic, I consent" or nothing. THAT'S the sort of consent that should be required for, say, long-term contracts.

But for sex? Yeah, no. If we're honest, a lot of sex is "I'm not really thinking clearly in the moment but I want it" kind of consent. I think we should realize that sort of reality.

People have a lot of seriously silly ideas about consent that they put in place generally to protect one sex, and not the other.

One sex they see as innocent, sweet, victimized, and without agency. And the other sex they see as being dirty evil hound dogs.

Some think you can't consent if you're doing something for money. It's exploitation, they say, "women must be protected". What about male prostitutes? Well who knows? Not them! Anyway it's totally different than doing other work, they believe, because working at a job is good, just not if it's sex work. Because if a job is sexy it's wrong! Unless it's porn because then it's … look there's no explanation for one kind of adult entertainment being allowed and another being outlawed.

Looks like now in the UK they're wanting to allege that husbands are rapists if the wife is "dependent". Because a woman is so "dependent" on the man, she's just a helpless victim who cannot do anything and everything she does is one big act to please her male overlord. Gimme a break.

Then there's drunk sex. Can't have that. Even though she's clearly horny and wanting it. Nope, because her decision making is different, it's impaired. Don't tell them that are different levels of effects for alcohol, from tipsy to fucking unconscious. Wait did the guy get so drunk he lost consciousness and she fucked him, oh well! He can't be raped because cock never lies! Did someone say their decisions were impaired leading them to drive drunk? Well they're going to throw the book at that drunk! Pffft, drunks, thinking they can tell us their decision making was impaired. Like we would believe that!

Then there's age of consent. Of course a man sleeping with a young innocent girl is so wrong. So exploitative, he's ruined her or something, damaged her with his wicked man sex. So bad. Did a woman do it, well I guess maybe we should punish her. The boy who said he wanted the sex seems like he was happy. Of course it would NEVER happen that a girl would like sex or enjoy sex. NEVER. Pay no attention to any claims otherwise.

Some people think we can rescind consent during sex. And those people are RIGHT, it's called, "no stop, I don't want to do this anymore FUCKING STOP" or "I told you NOT to do that without the condom, FUCKING STOP, ASSHOLE." There are some dipshits who think that if feel bad at some point he should like use his telepathic powers (which men are all assumed to have) to detect it without her having to say anything! Or he should like figure it out from her face or moans which look and sound like the other faces and moans she communicates. Then he should fix it and magically make her emotions feel so happy yay wholesome wonderful not bad or naughty. Yeah, they're crazy and think if the sex felt bad to them (ie. "omg I feel like a slut") it means that it was wrong sex.

Then there's the people that think it's rape if she doesn't say she consents. I don't think they know that in a relationship or even on a date you sometimes just start being amorous with each other and things progress. A grown up could stop that at any time by saying no. Why are we so quick to have women take on this ultra victim role where she is so cowardly she can't even squeak no because there's a man? Do we seriously as a society view all women as delicate little angels and all men are as scary and evil?

>>51426
oh boy, yet another reason not to touch a british woman with a 10 foot pole

>>52438
>i later objected, and he raped me, im so traumatized

>>54009
>>52438

This is basically the driving plot point behind the movie Cherry 2000

i feel sorry for you british women. soon its gonna be impossible to find a man. theres no way betas are gonna fuck around with laws like this in place, and all the alphas are gonna be in jail or move away

passin

>>51742
Believe me, you'd rather be pissed off with a fine than in prison.

>>51474
>Great, make it even harder for me to score some dick

Don't worry, I'm sure they'll next pass a law saying it's illegal for an unmarried man to turn down a woman for sex. And in fact if a man turns down a woman for sex, that TOO is rape. Because Feminism.

No! This can't be happening!

>>58607
I saw a chart of "how can he abuse you?" and right next to each other were "asking for sex" and "neglecting you sexually" so we're practically already there.