Harsh sentence

retro:electro

GreeBo wrote: »

What you fail to comprehend is that your feelings don't make it s sexual assault.

And your feelings don’t make it not not a sexual assault
The point remains; fingering someone in their sleep without consent does constitute sexual assault, whether it’s considered acceptable in the parameters of your relationship or not. Because all it takes is your wife/gf/hook up to decide that this time she felt violated and that a boundary was crossed. And she could very well decide to report you for that, and there’s not a damn thing that you can do about it. And telling the guards that “their feelings don’t make it sexual assault” won’t really negate what just happened or work in your favour; because we have a law that decides that, not you.

Robert Wolfe

BBFAN wrote: »

That is very disturbing. I think you need help for that.

What help should I get?

On the flipside, many times I've ended up in bed with a very drunk girl and never touched her (I wait until the morning when she's hungover and horny).

Reviews and Books Galore

If he penetrated her with his fingers, wouldn't that be classed as rape?

Dante7

In the case under discussion, the accused did not insert his fingers into the victim's vagina. This is just made up nonsense by a lunatic fringe on this thread. If the accused had put his finger(s) inside the victim it would have been described as digital penetration. Vagina meaning the internal organ is a strictly medical term, and not a legal term. It is taken as read that he touched the outside of her genitals and did not penetrate her.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Boggles wrote: »

I am using what you have all ready clearly defined as "fingering", a definition you were clear about in telling the anecdote about your friend.





That is pretty clearly defined.

So I'll state once more.



Just so we are clear when I say "fingering", I'm using your clear definition of it.

I was talking about what happened to my friend there. In that case, fingers were inserted. I know that’s what happened because she told me. That doesn’t mean that I think that that’s the entirety of the definition of fingering, does it? What you quoted of mine certainly doesn’t indicate that I think that’s the entirety of what fingering entails. I just know that it’s what happened to her because she told me. When she woke, fingers were inserted.

Your claim that you don’t want to get semantical rings a little bit hollow when you are nit-picking to this extent.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Dante7 wrote: »

In the case under discussion, the accused did not insert his fingers into the victim's vagina. This is just made up nonsense by a lunatic fringe on this thread. If the accused had put his finger(s) inside the victim it would have been described as digital penetration. Vagina meaning the internal organ is a strictly medical term, and not a legal term. It is taken as read that he touched the outside of her genitals and did not penetrate her.

If you’re talking about me, I know that. I read the article in the OP. I didn’t say that the accused inserted his fingers into the victim’s vagina. Maybe somebody else on the thread did but I did not.

Boggles

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Your claim that you don’t want to get semantical rings a little bit hollow when you are nit-picking to this extent.

Again, there is no one nit-picking apart from your good self.

Your evolving definition was purely to keep pace with your dishonesty.

You have been asked several times now to back up your claims, you can't because your claims are bogus.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Boggles wrote: »

Again, there is no one nit-picking apart from your good self.

Your evolving definition was purely to keep pace with your dishonesty.

You have been asked several times now to back up your claims, you can't because your claims are bogus.

No, they’re not.

My definition didn’t change, I just didn’t cover the definition entirely in the post about my friend because, well, why would I? I was specifically describing what happened to her and you decided that I thought that was the full definition of fingering.

Unless you can explain how saying my friend woke up with fingers inserted into her vagina means that I think fingers being inserted into a vagina is the entirety of the definition of fingering? Seriously, I’m all ears.

Or you could just admit that you are being obdurate now because you don’t want to be wrong. Two posters have openly admitted on the thread to intimately touching fully asleep partners. You seriously wanna nitpick about what exactly that entails? And why would anything other than insertion of fingers into the vagina be any more acceptable anyway? Vagina is a no-no but vulva or clit is... grand?

Boggles

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Two posters have openly admitted on the thread to intimately touching fully asleep partners. You seriously wanna nitpick about what exactly that entails?

Again the only person indulging in nit-pickage is your good self.

The 2 posters were clear and honest, one you annoyed so much with your chicanery they got fooked off and left the thread.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Boggles wrote: »

Again the only person indulging in nit-pickage is your good self.

The 2 posters were clear and honest, one you annoyed so much with your chicanery they got fooked off and left the thread.

I’m going to take this reply as a tacit admission that I did not in fact fully define ‘fingering’ in the post you quoted as apparent evidence. And with that, your position crumbles.

GreeBo

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Two posters have openly admitted on the thread to intimately touching fully asleep partners. You seriously wanna nitpick about what exactly that entails? And why would anything other than insertion of fingers into the vagina be any more acceptable anyway? Vagina is a no-no but vulva or clit is... grand?

I often wake my 8 month old daughter by kissing her, other than my wife I dont kiss anyone else on the face as its an intimate act. Am I now abusing my daughter along with my wife in your eyes?

Boggles

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’m going to take this reply as a tacit admission that I did not in fact fully define ‘fingering’ in the post you quoted as apparent evidence. And with that, your position crumbles.

We have all ready established, with your words, opinion and anecdotes that you most certainly define fingering the exact same way as the majority of people do. Your being silly because you are been dishonest and you have been called on it several times now.

Unless you want to provide that evidence you have been promising now for the best part of a week?

Tick, Tock.....

LillySV

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Whoever he thought he fondled, he thought they were awake because he said "show me your clit". I think some people in the thread are forgetting this

The fact they heard it shows they were...

I think the way this country is gone... men would want to go around with a go pro on their head 24/7, ensure they don’t get within 2metres of a woman without written consent from the woman and her solicitor ....

Kidchameleon

LillySV wrote: »

I think the way this country is gone... men would want to go around with a go pro on their head 24/7, ensure they don’t get within 2metres of a woman without written consent from the woman and her solicitor ....

You know what, I would bet loads of guys are now secretly filming their one night stands due to the current climate. Not to be perves but as insurance against false rape claims. Thanks for that #metoo

retro:electro

LillySV wrote: »

I think the way this country is gone... men would want to go around with a go pro on their head 24/7, ensure they don’t get within 2metres of a woman without written consent from the woman and her solicitor ....

Na. Just don’t go shoving your hands in intimate places on women without their consent, particularly the ones you don’t know and are not in a relationship with, and you should be okay.
Might be a bit of a struggle for some people on this thread however.

Kidchameleon

retro:electro wrote: »

Na. Just don’t go shoving your hands in intimate places on women without their consent, particularly the ones you don’t know and are not in a relationship with, and you should be okay.
Might be a bit of a struggle for some people on this thread however.

the man in the case being discussed didnt shove anything in anywhere

retro:electro

LillySV wrote: »

The fact they heard it shows they were...

She clearly woke up when he touched her? If she was awake the whole time as you’re saying, then how does his defence of “I thought she was my girlfriend” work for you? Surely if she was awake he would have known exactly who she was...no?

GreeBo

retro:electro wrote: »

She clearly woke up when he touched her? If she was awake the whole time as you’re saying, then how does his defence of “I thought she was my girlfriend” work for you? Surely if she was awake he would have known exactly who she was...no?

Erm, why would her being asleep or awake have any bearing on who he thought she was?
As soon as he realized it was not her he left.

She was fully awake at the time since she knows what he said to her.

Note that there is no mention of her saying anything to stop him before he left, if I was awake and someone was doing something to me that I didn't want I'd do or at least say something about it.

Grayson

Kidchameleon wrote: »

You know what, I would bet loads of guys are now secretly filming their one night stands due to the current climate. Not to be perves but as insurance against false rape claims. Thanks for that #metoo

So what you're saying is that men are committing a type of sex crime, secretly recording women when they're having sex, to avoid being accused of a sex crime.....

makes about as much sense any everything else on AH.

retro:electro

GreeBo wrote: »

Erm, why would her being asleep or awake have any bearing on who he thought she was?
As soon as he realized it was not her he left.

She was fully awake at the time since she knows what he said to her.

Note that there is no mention of her saying anything to stop him before he left, if I was awake and someone was doing something to me that I didn't want I'd do or at least say something about it.

She clearly woke up at his touch and subsequently heard his most romantic words whisper in her inner ear.

Falling asleep your neither fully awake or fully asleep, but most importantly it’s an extremely vulnerable state to be in and you’re certainly in no position to consent to sexual contact. You’re literally falling over yourself trying to support an argument that seemingly not even the defence have argued nor has the accused disputed.

Bit alas, I am conversing with someone who sees touching people while they sleep as an entitlement, so forgive me if I do not give a crap about your opinion on this instance.

Kidchameleon

Grayson wrote: »

So what you're saying is that men are committing a type of sex crime, secretly recording women when they're having sex, to avoid being accused of a sex crime.....

makes about as much sense any everything else on AH.

No I am guessing they are, I am not saying that anyone is definitley doing it. I personally would not but I would understand why someone would given the current climate.

GreeBo

retro:electro wrote: »

She clearly woke up at his touch and subsequently heard his most romantic words whisper in her inner ear.

"Clearly?" Could you show where thats clear thanks?

retro:electro wrote: »

Falling asleep your neither fully awake or fully asleep, but most importantly it’s an extremely vulnerable state to be in and you’re certainly in no position to consent to sexual contact. You’re literally falling over yourself trying to support an argument that seemingly not even the defence have argued nor has the accused disputed.

Nonsense. Falling asleep means you are awake. By definition you cannot fall asleep if you are already asleep.
It's a lot like when someone is dying, they are alive until they die and then they are dead.

his is super simple stuff tbh.

Bit alas, I am conversing with someone who sees touching people while they sleep as an entitlement, so forgive me if I do not give a crap about your opinion on this instance.

I would sink down to your level of discussion but I can't even imagine what it's like down there.

Btw you totally ignored my question on your statement of
"Surely if she was awake he would have known exactly who she was..."

Can you explain this as I cannot understand the relevance.

retro:electro

GreeBo wrote: »

"Clearly?" Could you show where thats clear.

Ahh but before you go finger wagging at me and shouting proof and what not, can you provide proof that this either did or did not happen?

GreeBo wrote: »

if I was awake and someone was doing something to me that I didn't want I'd do or at least say something about it.

I mean that’s a nice little anecdote and all but this isn’t really about you. You seem to have not only positioned yourself in the room that night, but be judging those who were in the room based on your own intimate standards. How do you know she didn’t shout after him? Are you basing your extremely elaborate theories on an extremely limited few line article?

GreeBo wrote: »

I would sink down to your level of discussion but I can't even imagine what it's like down there

I’m not sure it’s possible for you to sink any lower tbh.

Grayson

Kidchameleon wrote: »

No I am guessing they are, I am not saying that anyone is definitley doing it. I personally would not but I would understand why someone would given the current climate.

I wouldn't understand it. As far as I'm concerned the type of person who would record a woman having sex without their knowledge is the same type of creep who would have trouble understanding No.

they are both intensely wrong and violations of the women's rights.

And to suggest that it's happening because they're scared the woman will say they didn't consent is equally wrong. It's literally blaming the persons who's privacy is being violated.

Mrsmum

Grayson wrote: »

I wouldn't understand it. As far as I'm concerned the type of person who would record a woman having sex without their knowledge is the same type of creep who would have trouble understanding No.

they are both intensely wrong and violations of the women's rights.

And to suggest that it's happening because they're scared the woman will say they didn't consent is equally wrong. It's literally blaming the persons who's privacy is being violated.

Ah but you see, creeps can convince themselves that their warped thinking is normal..

Reviews and Books Galore

I find it disturbing how posters ate accusing people of being a rapist to win an argument.

Also, what if a woman records one night stands for her safety and to have proof if rape happens so that the court trial is less traumatic? Is she somebody who won't take no for an answer?

Sweet.Science

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Aaaah, were you not creeped out by that?

No i didn’t care . And I’m not trying to make a point that there is different rules when it comes to men and women . It’s just that most men don’t care . I’ve woken up to woman carrying out a sexual act on me . Thought it was great

Now if I done that to a woman I would get 10 years

It’s just the way it is

GreeBo

retro:electro wrote: »

Ahh but before you go finger wagging at me and shouting proof and what not, can you provide proof that this either did or did not happen?

How about from the mouth of the victim?
"She said she was falling asleep when Doran came into the room"

retro:electro wrote: »

I mean that’s a nice little anecdote and all but this isn’t really about you. You seem to have not only positioned yourself in the room that night, but be judging those who were in the room based on your own intimate standards. How do you know she didn’t shout after him? Are you basing your extremely elaborate theories on an extremely limited few line article?

I'm basing my replies on the reported facts of the case. You are basing your replies on your own opinions in general.

retro:electro wrote:

Surely if she was awake he would have known exactly who she was...

Any chance at all you can answer my question on this statement you made?
3 times I've asked it now I think.

retro:electro

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm basing my replies on the reported facts of the case. You are basing your replies on your own opinions

You’re basing your replies based on speculation and conjecture, not to mention your own bias opinion and outdated myth. What you would or wouldn’t have done in her position, yet alone what you do or don’t do in the bedroom is of absolutely no interest to anyone. Unless you find yourself on the receiving end of an allegation (which judging by your boastful posts about touching women while they sleep, could be sooner rather than later) your sexual habits are neither here nor there, nor interesting.
So, can you tell me what exactly you’ve read in these reported facts that leads you to conclude she didn’t tell him to gtfo?

GreeBo wrote: »

Any chance at all you can answer my question on this statement you made?
3 times I've asked it now I think.

His whole defence is built around the fact he mistook her identity while she was unresponsive. The fact she was falling asleep and thus couldn’t consent is not up for debate, not even by the convicted sex offender.
If she was awake as you’re at pains to assume, it would make it a lot harder for him to mistake her identity. You’re literally plucking shlt out of the sky to try and defend an argument that wasn’t even presented in court.

Kidchameleon

Grayson wrote: »

And to suggest that it's happening because they're scared the woman will say they didn't consent is equally wrong. It's literally blaming the persons who's privacy is being violated.

I never said it was happening, I said I wouldnt be surprised if it was. I have no proof that it is happening.

Would be better to be charged with filiming something rather than a false rape claim. What are the laws regarding recording? Is a person not allowed to record whatever they want in their own home?