jfields

He has like 81 posts so far today, plus he has confessed to his animal fetish. It seems like we have a winner! Thoughts?

Kevin, Thanks for more articulately stating what I've been trying to get across. Also Bill, for the succinct restatement of "Maybe it's just as important to teach women 'say no when you mean no' as it is to teach men 'no means no.'". When it comes to avoiding the peculiar junction where sex and crime meet, I don't want to be relying on my psychic powers. My wife says mine are horrible.

So a 3-way with you, JT and a duck is a pate sandwich? Dude, you are grossing me out even more than Clay's mutton-lovin'!

Now that you've admitted it, doesn't it feel better? As an aside, do you use foie gras instead of KY, you sick bastard?

Just doing my job.

Yeah, whatever..... duck-lover! And when you jerk off, it is like skeet, shooting at things that act like ducks.

And Clay blamed everything on Skreamer. You see, denial is all part of the sad, sad love affair you have with ducks.

Hell is totally freezing over right now. I agree with Rhino.

Maybe JT is to ducks what Clay was to sheep, and he is just trying to postwhore to fully express his feelings.

Nice!

Fine. That is your right, but with that right, don't you also have the responsibility of letting them know that? That is a cop-out. Where is the fairness in a double-standard? Guys are responsible for their actions no matter what, yet women are legally able to place the sole blame for any bad judgements they have on the guys when it comes to sex? The guys in this case were probably insensitive, using poor judgement, pretty tasteless (IMHO), and stupid; but does her failure to even tell them to stop turn their other faults into rape? We aren't talking about someone who was unconcious, or silent, or drugged. My guess is that she explicitly consented for a long time. Where is a shred of personal responsibility on her part?

I hope the roof is a lot higher than the 6th floor where his office is located. That isn't very high!

Vallerina, I'm going to argue points, but please don't take it as either a criticism of your actions, or a specific defense of the guys in the article. And know that I'd never find myself in their particular shoes. It is just the "slippery slope" that bothers me, and the precident it sets for even innocent men to get slapped with rape charges, however infrequently... Well, you you what they say about assuming... Maybe clear to you, but if subtle, maybe not clear to them. But she had, willingly. What if she had stated the same thing she did, but had followed it up with something clearer and they had stopped immediately. What would it have been then? I actually think the opposite. They were drunk. She was straight sober, and CHOSE to get frisky with both of them, have sex with one guy, then start to have sex with the second guy, KNOWING they were drunk and impaired. I'm not saying drunkeness defends rape. It doesn't. But it does call into question how the single sober person who had agreed to the activities could think that a vague statement would be crystal clear to a drunk guy who just saw you have sex with another drunk guy then start on him. In those circumstances, I'd think after how far she took things willingly, it would be her responsibility to be pretty damned clear about her desire to withdraw her consent. After that, the responsibility would be on the man to stop immediately, drunk or not. In my eyes, she failed to give them that clear notice, which brings into question whether she effectively withdrew her consent or not.

[sarcasm] It is clearly evidence of the growing government invasion into our personal liberties. It is time to stand strong on your rights! Don't let them disempower you. Assert your second amendment rights and start blasting! Do so right now, or forever relinquish your liberty! [/sarcasm]

This is the part that scares many guys. There has to be a point where a woman that has previously consented can let a guy know to stop where he hasn't "already gone to far". Otherwise, we are getting to the point where all sexual acts leave men liable as rapists, even if they didn't know it. There has to be a window of opportunity during which a guy can stop and not be considered a rapist. Perhaps the more clearly she articulates her wishes, the shorter it should be, but it can't be a retroactive line that men can cross without even knowing it. I'm not saying the guys in this case were faultless. If nothing else, they exhibited really poor judgement. So did she, but she isn't the one facing jail time. A sober considerate guy certainly should at least think about it. If they hadn't stopped immediately, but they picked up on it and stopped when you said something firmer, would that have been rape? Add into the mix drunken guys, multiple guys, entire acts already completed with consent, and maybe something a little less subtle would have been appropriate before considering it rape.

Damn! A discussion that has sunk to beer, massages and fat, confined cows, without Clay to chime in. Poor guy!

Not to mention, they can "improve", only to have a relapse later, requiring more time off. Good suggestion, Wendy!

No thanks, but enquiring minds want to know if you turned them blue. I've never heard of guys getting blueballs from toilet bowl cleaners, but stranger things have happened....

That took balls! Kudos!

So don't you have like 1900 flushes to go? By the way, right hand or left, and have you rubbed your Smurfiness off on any other body parts that we can begin mocking?

True. It will be interesting to see what the final outcome is after all the various appeals. The legal ramifications are pretty substantial. From the initial post, this case really has nothing to do with whether males had premeditated the act of rape. By her own account, she was a willing participant for quite awhile. Using the traditional dictionary definitions of rape, it didn't even happen. Where was the force? Where was the clearly withdrawn consent? I'm not condoning rape, or in any way slighting womens' right to choose with whom and how they have sex. But it is not reasonable that a man must be a psychic to know at all times whether consent has been withdrawn, even after being explicitly given? Does "Oooh, baby, deeper" mean "Oooh, baby, you'll get in deeper trouble if you don't stop right now."? I don't think so. After giving, and reaffirming, her consent through all the previous acts, it does take something unambiguous to rescind all that. As mentioned by others in the thread, "no", "stop", "I don't want to have sex with you" or "get off me now, I changed my mind" would be fine. Then it is the guys responsibility to do just that, promptly and without arguement. The guy has to be 100% sure of her wishes, then disregard them, for it to be rape. If any guy has sex with a woman that he isn't 100% sure does want him there, he is an idiot. Who wants to have sex with an ambivalent partner? But nobody can be required to be a psychic. Nobody, man or woman. This case isn't about rape. It is about the broader issue of equality. Men can't be held to a higher standard of responsibility than women. That is unfair to both men and women. If this verdict holds up, it is no triumph of women's rights. It does huge damage to the concept of women's equality. It says that women aren't smart enough to clearly express their wishes and aren't responsible for their own actions. That would be tragic. Women deserve better.

Have New Jersey's toxic fumes gone to your brain, man? Puh-lease!

Seems kind of silly to me. If you are going to take that kind of beef, you might as well eat as a steak, instead of in a burger. Here is a blurb on Wagyu/Kobe beef: http://www.suttonplacegourmet.com/beef/beef.html

Depends on your tastes. It could be something like the MOMA (Museum of Modern Art), or just cruising through private galleries. I'd have to say to go deli. You can get great cuisine of different ethnic groups there, but you can other places as well. So find a really good deli and just savor the New York experience. I'm not a local, so I can't make any great suggestions from an educated perspective. I've been to two different (Stage & Carnegie?) and they were both really good. Have fun!

I'll look at Bloomington, but I figured I'd stand the best shot of a ride, as well as the cheapest fares, if I fly from Washington DC to Chicago. Lots of quick non-stop flights. I'm just debating my options, now that both of my driving partners from my local area have wimped out. If you want it done right, you got to do it yourself!