Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Rape - wankers!
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
Laura Lasange |
It's rather ironic that those women in the media who are making so much of the controversy seem to think that rape only happens to women, so their outrage at Clarke's 'dinosaur' views is a little compromised. |
|
Pumpkinhead |
Who were those lunatic women on BBC Newsnight last night talking about rape? They gave women a bad name. Were they feminists or just thick? |
|
Not Convinced By The Media |
"Its Extremely rare that a 16 year old boy would be convicted of rape, if he had sex consentiously with his 15 year old girlfriend. Common sex would usually prevail in these cases."
That proves my point, they are {and always have been) treated differently. Very much differently. But the media and the politicians want to present themselves as being equally tough on a crime which they tell us is always equally serious. Interesting Fruedian Slip incidentally. Stupid. superficial and intended for Public Consumption Only. |
|
Ted |
Courts are nothing more than institutionalized lynching mobs given the illusions of respectability. They only want to punish people, not cure crime. I mean, what would these scumbag lawyers and self-righteous judges do without it? |
|
robbiex |
Not Convinced By The Media wrote:
What's the difference between a man using his superior physical strength to terrify a woman and have sex with her against her wishes, causing her immense psychological and physical harm and a 16 year old guy having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend?
They both qualify as "rape". One is more "serious" than the other.
Its Extremely rare that a 16 year old boy would be convicted of rape, if he had sex consentiously with his 15 year old girlfriend. Common sex would usually prevail in these cases. I do agree with Clarke though for once, that are varying degrees of rape, just like any other crime. |
|
|
|
