Some women want to be grabbed by the pussy by some men some of the time. To legislate that it is automagically sexual assault is acting directly against the wishes of some of the so-called victims.
All things vagina are not inherently sexual. Just like grabbing someone by the balls and squeezing as hard as you can - not sexual; just assault. Legal fictions are incompatible with justice.
grabbing her by the pussy
-
Iwannaplato
- Posts: 341
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: grabbing her by the pussy
double post
Re: grabbing her by the pussy
What was your first post?
Re: grabbing her by the pussy
What does the 'it' word you used here refer to, EXACTLY?
If 'it' is; 'grabbing her by the pussy', then HOW, EXACTLY, could 'it' be 'automatically' sexual assault?
If 'it' is WANTED, then WHO would even become aware of 'it', for 'it' to even become, automatically, sexual assault, which one would be charged for such a thing?
If 'it' was legislated to become, automatically, sexual assault, and she wanted 'it', then IF ANY one got charged with 'it', then that one would just have to say to the judge and/or jury, that I was just doing what SHE WANTED.
Then if a legislated system punished and/or ridiculed a human being for doing what another human being WANTED done to them, then, SURELY, that would be a SIGN to REMOVE those who legislated such a thing, correct?
But what if he WANTED to be grabbed by the balls, (and squeezed as hard as she could), then how is that 'assault'?
To legislate that that is 'assault' would be acting directly against the wishes of the so-called victim, correct?
What is 'justice', and, what is compatible with 'justice', to you, EXACTLY?
-
promethean75
- Posts: 924
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm
Re: grabbing her by the pussy
"Some women want to be grabbed by the pussy by some men some of the time."
We have established that:
1) Some women want to be grabbed by the pussy by some men all of the time.
2) Some women want to be grabbed by the pussy by some men none of the time.
3) Never do all women want to be grabbed by the pussy by some men all of the time.
I also agree that pussy grabbing isn't always sexual. For example, if a man and a woman were climbing a tower together and the woman started to slip and was in danger of falling, the man might have to grab her by the pussy to save her. Also, grabbing a woman by the pussy could prevent her from falling out of a helicopter in some cases.
We have established that:
1) Some women want to be grabbed by the pussy by some men all of the time.
2) Some women want to be grabbed by the pussy by some men none of the time.
3) Never do all women want to be grabbed by the pussy by some men all of the time.
I also agree that pussy grabbing isn't always sexual. For example, if a man and a woman were climbing a tower together and the woman started to slip and was in danger of falling, the man might have to grab her by the pussy to save her. Also, grabbing a woman by the pussy could prevent her from falling out of a helicopter in some cases.
-
Iwannaplato
- Posts: 341
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: grabbing her by the pussy
Let's allow all behavior that some small subset of people like having other people do to them. If some people like to be dominated roughly and anally penetrated, not for sexual reasons, then it isn't sexual when anyone does that to anyone. The small group likes this because it is denigrating and they like utter submission. That other people take it sexually or we have some legislation couching it as sexual it is wrongheaded. And it should be ok to do to people.
I do like prometheus' potential court defense. One only need convince the jury that the woman seemed to be about to fall out of a helicopter. I'm heading out to save some people from invisible sharks by lifting them up by their nostrils. I have never felt so free and unjudged.
I do like prometheus' potential court defense. One only need convince the jury that the woman seemed to be about to fall out of a helicopter. I'm heading out to save some people from invisible sharks by lifting them up by their nostrils. I have never felt so free and unjudged.
Re: grabbing her by the pussy
Some women might want to be grabbed by the pussy by a man on occasion.
But that is not the sort of talk we ought to expect from a leader.
But that is not the sort of talk we ought to expect from a leader.
-
promethean75
- Posts: 924
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm
Re: grabbing her by the pussy
Speaking of shark attacks, we've never seen anything like this before... as far as great film footage is concerned.
I should at least warn you in advance - if you aren't already aware of such - about the nature and purpose of this site. It gets no more graphic than this, and if you are permanently philosophically and/or psychologically ruined, deranged, plummeted headlong into a seething nihilistic abyss of atheism and existential despair because of what you see, well... I hitherto am exempt from any responsibility in this matter.
Verily, I say to you, abandon all hope ye who clicks here: https://goredb.com/w/pz4VMZEgRpGXkiWA1Mne32
I should at least warn you in advance - if you aren't already aware of such - about the nature and purpose of this site. It gets no more graphic than this, and if you are permanently philosophically and/or psychologically ruined, deranged, plummeted headlong into a seething nihilistic abyss of atheism and existential despair because of what you see, well... I hitherto am exempt from any responsibility in this matter.
Verily, I say to you, abandon all hope ye who clicks here: https://goredb.com/w/pz4VMZEgRpGXkiWA1Mne32
-
promethean75
- Posts: 924
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm
Re: grabbing her by the pussy
Gore media is like the hyper-expression of what the Buddha experienced during his voluntary period of homelessness when he observed all the poverty, suffering, disease and sickness in old age, that so inspired his philosophical views.
Yo imagine if the Buddha had internet. How much harder would his philosophy go if he had actually seen some of that shit? Like the worst he mighta saw was maybe a starving old person with a missing leg and a hairlip sitting in a village... and then from that he jumps to the major, immovable conclusion that would end up forming the basis of his final verdict; life sucks. No seriously.
If you think life sucks because of that, you ain't seen nuthin, B. What's missing is the sheer warlike force of his atheism against metaphysics in general, especially religions. He was too stoic and chill. He wasn't appalled enough because he didn't have internet.
This is perhaps why Fritz and I class B as a joyful nihilist who's satisfied and contented resignation from active social and economic life was actually a sign of strength and good hygiene. B did not despair and denigrate the self as other nihilistic religions did (Christianity par excellence) as a result of his recognizing the ultimate meaninglessness of everything.
But that he did not make a creative, active and engaged strength out of that iron resolve that we so admire when he denies his own will, we must class him as a sage and not an artist or overman.
He'd be like the Buddha 3.0 if he came back as a bodisatttva. Shit is out of control on the erf, bruh.
Anywho what we must remember as philosophers is that if we haven't had such horrible experiences ourselves, we are that much less qualified to pass judgement on these greatest of existential problems. But if in addition to having no direct experience of it ourselves, we also have no second hand experience of it by virtue of never seeing it in media... well that's just noobism at another level.
You HAVE to see this stuff before you write your final dissertation. It's not enough to 'hear that it happens' and read about it, bros.
I only hope that seeing such stuff would enhance your humanist sympathies and sensibilities if you already have them, or finally convert you to a militant atheist humanist if you don't.
Yo imagine if the Buddha had internet. How much harder would his philosophy go if he had actually seen some of that shit? Like the worst he mighta saw was maybe a starving old person with a missing leg and a hairlip sitting in a village... and then from that he jumps to the major, immovable conclusion that would end up forming the basis of his final verdict; life sucks. No seriously.
If you think life sucks because of that, you ain't seen nuthin, B. What's missing is the sheer warlike force of his atheism against metaphysics in general, especially religions. He was too stoic and chill. He wasn't appalled enough because he didn't have internet.
This is perhaps why Fritz and I class B as a joyful nihilist who's satisfied and contented resignation from active social and economic life was actually a sign of strength and good hygiene. B did not despair and denigrate the self as other nihilistic religions did (Christianity par excellence) as a result of his recognizing the ultimate meaninglessness of everything.
But that he did not make a creative, active and engaged strength out of that iron resolve that we so admire when he denies his own will, we must class him as a sage and not an artist or overman.
He'd be like the Buddha 3.0 if he came back as a bodisatttva. Shit is out of control on the erf, bruh.
Anywho what we must remember as philosophers is that if we haven't had such horrible experiences ourselves, we are that much less qualified to pass judgement on these greatest of existential problems. But if in addition to having no direct experience of it ourselves, we also have no second hand experience of it by virtue of never seeing it in media... well that's just noobism at another level.
You HAVE to see this stuff before you write your final dissertation. It's not enough to 'hear that it happens' and read about it, bros.
I only hope that seeing such stuff would enhance your humanist sympathies and sensibilities if you already have them, or finally convert you to a militant atheist humanist if you don't.