- Joined
- Mar 21, 2015
- Messages
- 20
- Reaction score
- 13
That is why I use the code word “Keep Going”.
haha yup. Just got back from Spring BreakI was wondering when we'd see some @touchpause13 in this thread...
That's what the criminal background check is for though, right?
Really, dude? Really?That is why I use the code word “Keep Going”.
Nothing brings out the amateur comedians like a thread about rapeReally, dude? Really?
Wow, I actually just did not get that, because it is incomprehensible to me that someone would joke about that while in a thread about the consequences of that very thing. This world makes me sad sometimes.Really, dude? Really?
🙁 I hate it when you're right, you know 😛Nothing brings out the amateur comedians like a thread about rape
She very clearly communicated for him to stop, per her testimony. Not like, keep going sort of stop. Like, crying and begging him to stop. That's not really gray area. This guy clearly wanted to have a sexual experience with her that was not a good time and was not consensual. Anyone who knows anything about BDSM understands exactly why what he did was completely unacceptable on every level. This isn't some gray area, he broke every rule and should never be a physician, because he forcibly sexually assaulted an unwilling partner. There is no gray area there.I don't know why you guys are so insistent on labeling the guy as a rapist or not. In human behavior, nothing is really black and white as there are shades of gray. It's not always nonconsensual even if they say stop as there are different ways of saying stop with different meanings. For example, if the girl is mad at you and you're trying to cajole them and they're saying stop but kinda mad/sorta playfully. Is that rape? I notice that it's the women who are totally against this guy but none of us were there with them at the moment. It's a hard thing to judge when you're not there and even when you are, you may not understand the entire backstory of the relationship. I don't think it's not right to end a person's career because of a mistake or a miscommunication. It's also very easy for people to make false accusations and dealing with them is incredibly stressful and takes a lot of time. That's not to diminish what happened to victims of assault but there are at least two sides to every story
This times a billion.She very clearly communicated for him to stop, per her testimony. Not like, keep going sort of stop. Like, crying and begging him to stop. That's not really gray area. This guy clearly wanted to have a sexual experience with her that was not a good time and was not consensual. Anyone who knows anything about BDSM understands exactly why what he did was completely unacceptable on every level. This isn't some gray area, he broke every rule and should never be a physician, because he forcibly sexually assaulted an unwilling partner. There is no gray area there.
She very clearly communicated for him to stop, per her testimony. Not like, keep going sort of stop. Like, crying and begging him to stop. That's not really gray area. This guy clearly wanted to have a sexual experience with her that was not a good time and was not consensual. Anyone who knows anything about BDSM understands exactly why what he did was completely unacceptable on every level. This isn't some gray area, he broke every rule and should never be a physician, because he forcibly sexually assaulted an unwilling partner. There is no gray area there.
It's extremely rare for rape victims to lie.So we're going to trust someone's word absolutely just because. No one has ever lied or embellished anything ever.
Yeah except he admitted to the cops he assaulted her and was "doing something wrong."So we're going to trust someone's word absolutely just because. No one has ever lied or embellished anything ever.
Innocent until proven guilty is what the legal system works on
His innocence in a court of law does not change what he did.So we're going to trust someone's word absolutely just because. No one has ever lied or embellished anything ever.
Innocent until proven guilty is what the legal system works on
He wasn't proven innocent though, he just wasn't indicted (sp?)His innocence in a court of law does not change what he did.
He does not have to prove his innocence. It is assumed until guilt is proven. Kind of like how science can't prove that something doesn't exist, it can only prove that it has not been observed.He wasn't proven innocent though, he just wasn't indicted (sp?)
Good thing this ain't the legal system then.So we're going to trust someone's word absolutely just because. No one has ever lied or embellished anything ever.
Innocent until proven guilty is what the legal system works on
I would definitely like to see the transcripts as well.I mean, is our only view of the evidence from the articles written about it? How do you know that the quotes they pulled were not tailored to fit a certain narrative? Again I am not making a case for or against this particular guy, just a general logic question.
You're right. If you have prearranged with somebody ahead of time that they are to continue when you say 'stop' and established a safeword, in that very specific instance it is not rape to continue after they say 'no, stop'. Outside of that very specific scenario, however, yes, it is always nonconsensual once a party has said 'no' or 'stop'.It's not always nonconsensual even if they say stop
Stop has one meaning: discontinue your current course of action.as there are different ways of saying stop with different meanings.
Yup. And maybe 9/10 times you won't get called on it and everyone will change their minds and move forward, but in 10/10 of those times the person who said 'stop', no matter how 'playfully', would be justified in calling you to account if you did not. If you want to risk hurting someone because they might not be too upset if you continue, well...you have different priorities than I do, and I sincerely hope (for your sake and the other party's) that you always come up lucky with that gamble.For example, if the girl is mad at you and you're trying to cajole them and they're saying stop but kinda mad/sorta playfully. Is that rape?
No, there are men in this thread who also understand that it is rape. I'm not sure where you were going with this...women get worked up over issues of rape? Cuz that's not a particularly sympathetic approach to take on this, bud.I notice that it's the women who are totally against this guy
Again, backstory of the relationship doesn't matter when the story that both parties agree on is "she said 'no, stop,' and the dude felt justified in continuing with sex.but none of us were there with them at the moment. It's a hard thing to judge when you're not there and even when you are, you may not understand the entire backstory of the relationship.
The propensity to miscommunicate in a way that puts other people at risk may not be a jailable offense, but it's hardly desirable in someone who will have to care for others and sometimes make decisions for those who are at risk or unable to act alone.I don't think it's not right to end a person's career because of a mistake or a miscommunication.
It's actually not easy on the victim to accuse their rapist, so it's not just some simple walk in the park to go screaming 'rape' everywhere. There are 2 sides of this story, but as I said before, even the best case scenario presented by the defendant is one in which he is unsuited for the medical profession. That is listening to his side of things.It's also very easy for people to make false accusations and dealing with them is incredibly stressful and takes a lot of time. That's not to diminish what happened to victims of assault but there are at least two sides to every story
Everyone seems ready to declare this guy a rapist who should never be a doctor after reading one article about it. I agree that I would never want someone who doesn't understand boundaries and moral lines like this guy apparently does to be admitted to medical school, but I also wouldn't want someone attacked by the media losing their opportunities. It reminds me of when some athlete loses all of their sponsors after some bad press that turns out to be false in the end. Seems like judgement by mob rather than by court of law.I would definitely like to see the transcripts as well.
I imagine his lawyer told him not to speak to the press. His lawyer is quoted a few times in there, basically reinforcing that the defense was "he was roleplaying 50 shades of grey."What I see is that the article is written with a certain slant as the author provide multiple quotes from the accuser's testimony but none from the person who was accused. They do provide a quote from his lawyer but it ends there. I don't see any mention of cops and I don't see how a television show is relevant. Also, quotation marks are generally reserved for quotes.
"[Judge] Chiampas asked if the woman had said anything to Hossain when he bound her wrists or while he allegedly sexually assaulted her. She answered no to both questions."
It seems as though the issue is the physical violence of hitting her with the belt, not the act of sex itself as they have had previous sexual encounters that included bondage.
You can be almost completely certain that the kid's lawyers have hushed him up and told him to avoid speaking about the case in public other than the basics (denying the assault etc.), since any slip of the tongue can be used against him.What I see is that the article is written with a certain slant as the author provide multiple quotes from the accuser's testimony but none from the person who was accused. They do provide a quote from his lawyer but it ends there. I don't see any mention of cops and I don't see how a television show is relevant. Also, quotation marks are generally reserved for quotes.
So are you arguing that it's not rape, just mere assault on a classmate? Because you're still in a pretty dark place, buddy."[Judge] Chiampas asked if the woman had said anything to Hossain when he bound her wrists or while he allegedly sexually assaulted her. She answered no to both questions."
It seems as though the issue is the physical violence of hitting her with the belt, not the act of sex itself as they have had previous sexual encounters that included bondage.
Having had sex before, even with bondage, does not give him carte blanche on all future encounters.It seems as though the issue is the physical violence of hitting her with the belt, not the act of sex itself as they have had previous sexual encounters that included bondage.
All of the articles were drawn from the same series of quotes, it appears. To me, again, the key point is that the defending attorney is not disputing the events as described, but merely arguing that his client was under the impression that pressing forward was acceptable because 'they were roleplaying'. That's it, that's his argument. I'm surely not going to jump in and claim that the girl's testimony of how the events unfolded was false when the defense isn't even arguing that.I'm not picking a fight, but I am wondering where you are getting all of your info from? Is it just this one article or is there a transcript of the court proceedings? I don't think you can draw any conclusions about the case without first examining the source...
I feel like he could have done his (theoretical) medical career a lot of good by not mentioning that he was a pre-med.didn't read through the comments, but all I can say is if the first thing that comes to your mind while reporters ask you if you'll ever talk to the girl again is "I just want to be a doctor", you're a complete f*****g weirdo. how about not going to prison first? lmao, I truly hope this dude never becomes a doc
I feel like he could have done his (theoretical) medical career a lot of good by not mentioning that he was a pre-med.
That's like saying "If you agree with me, then continue breathing." If the girl was crying and shaking her head, the humane and sensible thing to do would be to stop and to make sure she was okay before any sexual assault actually occurs.This case is very murky. He asked the girl to resist, and she did. It would certainly make sense that he believed she was still role playing in her resistance.
Cool. Then in the future I'll earn my rent money by approaching random people with a knife and saying "I want you to pretend you don't want to give me your wallet". I assume they'll be into it, I'll have no reason to suspect that their resistance is real, and I'll just count the money as payment for fulfilling the fantasies I presume they had.This case is very murky. He asked the girl to resist, and she did. It would certainly make sense that he believed she was still role playing in her resistance.
That surgery analogy is super spot-on. Kudos.What kills me about this thread is that there not only is the stink of rape apologism and just general misunderstanding of consent, but there seems to be a complete lack of understanding of BDSM as well.
There could not have been informed consent in this case, because he didn't specify what he wanted to do. He vaguely said that he wanted to do something dangerous and she agreed to that general concept. That's not her giving consent to what happened. What normally happens is that everything is hashed out IN DETAIL before any sort of sexual activity takes place. If you want to have sex where "no" is not the safe word, you have to specify what the safe word actually is and going without any sort of way for the submissive to tap out is very rare and really should be reserved for partners who have been together for a really long time and are very experienced with this. What he did is like saying, I want to do an operation on you, then just amputating someone's leg without any further discussion. There could be no consent because she didn't know what was going to happen, and furthermore the standard meaning of stop is fuking stop. My cat knows that. It's not a complicated concept.
The trouble is, he never told her what they were going to do. He just asked "do you trust me?" tied her down, blindfolded her, and then started beating the hell out of her. She never consented to that, and was quite clear with her desire for him to stop, from all descriptions provided in the case. She clearly didn't know what the hell he was going to try, and once things crossed the line for her, she was afforded no opportunity for him to stop. This case only looks murky if you have no idea how these sorts of encounters should play out. By not establishing clear rules beforehand, and not establishing a safe word, you are the one who is in the wrong if your partner has no chance to end things, and you have raped them if you lost their consent and they were unable to make you stop. That is cut and dry. By not establishing rules and obtaining explicit consent beforehand, he set himself up to rape her, and that is on him in every way.This case is very murky. He asked the girl to resist, and she did. It would certainly make sense that he believed she was still role playing in her resistance.