~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
vivatonymartial
[–][deleted] 291 points292 points293 points 7 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
The sick part is that some people needed researchers to tell them that rape is rape.
I swear I see the same thing all the time with cutters. "Haha you think babies feel pain? Then why hasn't anyone proved it with an experiment huh??? Checkm8 lol"
[–][deleted] 76 points77 points78 points 7 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
Babies don't feel pain, when a tooth forces it's way through gum they just shrug and take it on the chin.
[–]SSininkas 23 points24 points25 points 7 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
Tell that to the American babies with mutilated penises
[–][deleted] 34 points35 points36 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't think they'd get the joke, much like you, babies have a different sort of sense of humour. Think along more slapstick lines if you want to get a baby going
[–]LandMineHare 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Some people need sarcasm tags.
[–]throwawayaway929292 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
My penis is very attractive thank you , nothing mutilated about it .
[–]ZombieInferno6 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
I'm circumsized and honestly I'm fine with it cuz now I don't have to worry about cleaning inside my foreskin
[–]Alter-P 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Cleaning the inside does not take more than a few seconds in the shower. Most people who say that (not saying you) are straight up lazy
[–]Jamez1469 -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
ost people who say that (not saying you) are
My parents just planned on me being lazy and they were right. I figured my kids would be lazy so I prepared them for it. Better to be ready them get some infection.
[–]Alter-P 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It doesn't take much care to clean and prevent infection, which is rare and tends to mainly occur with homeless people. I'd rather my son have the choice
[–]rahsoft 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I've gutted the inside of my home and honestly I'm fine with it cuz now I don't have to worry about cleaning inside my house....... /s
[–]SSininkas 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not only you're less sensitive, are unable to fap without lube, but must importantly you have fallen for the degenerate jewish trick
Same same . Plus they look weird . And most girls hate it
[–]epalsliphead 484 points485 points486 points 7 years ago (61 children) | Copy Link
Fucking duh!
Goes to show that people are just getting more stupid if they think there isn't such a thing like female-on-male rape.
[–]Passivefamiliar 27 points28 points29 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I live in the US. I got out of a relationship where this happened, and we have a child from it... but nobody even gives me the time of day about the idea. Women can't rape men, or so the thought goes. I've gone to therapy. I'm ok. But I don't know what to do in general. I love my child, but obviously don't live with the woman now and it's a constant stressor
[–]fuyukihana 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I've had two partners now who both experienced it within their families, and nearly their entire family practically disowned them over "making up impossible shit like that" and I just couldn't fucking stand these families. How you would do that to your own child outright disturbs me.
[–]Passivefamiliar 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Yeah....I don't speak with my own mom anymore. She's still playing nice with her. I bury it most of the time.
[–]fuyukihana 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Just... Unacceptable. I'm sorry you have to deal with that. Probably healthy to go no contact.
[–]Passivefamiliar 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Hey. Thanks. It's the internet. I've had a long few years and essentially losing my parents through disagreements has been hard. I get a lot of negative blowback "they are your parents, shame on you, blood is thicker than water" kinda remarks. But nobodies story is the same and sometimes it's not ok. So thanks for not making my little tidbit a witch hunt. Sometimes it's nice to have a random outlet for misery and the internet probably isn't the best but it's convenient and a nice blank slate of anonymity, ish.
[–][deleted] 84 points85 points86 points 7 years ago* (52 children) | Copy Link
White males have no rights under the new group think. Just like blacks can't be racist against whites, women can have abortions but a man who punches his pregnant gf gets charged with murder, etc.
Edit:
The fetus either is a human, and terminating it is murder, or it isn't human and terminating it isnt murder. Both parents created it, even though the female carries it. Who carries it shouldn't determine if its human or not.
It doesn't have to include assault. This guy got 22 years in jail for first degree homicide when he tried to trick his gf into taking an abortion pill:
http://fox11online.com/news/local/patel-sentenced-to-prison-in-forced-abortion-case
Why does he get 22 years for homicide if she can take the same action and terminate his child without jail time?
If it matters, he wanted to terminate the pregnancy because he was afraid they would have another child with a medical condition their first child has. He will be almost 70 when his prison term ends.
Disclaimer: I don't condone assaulting pregnant women. Just pointing out the hypocrisy in our legal system.
[–]fuyukihana 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The thing I find weird here is the idea that "new group think" is where we got the idea men can't be raped. I'm pretty sure that idea is extremely old, and that the new idea is that it is actually rape and men can indeed be the victims of it.
[–]frisch85 21 points22 points23 points 7 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link
You completely lost it in the second half and I don't even know how you'd even think about such a comparison. It'd be different tho if you used the comparison that "a wife sued the husband because he got a vasectomy without her knowing". Punching someone and killing a newborn by doing so is a completely different thing than getting an abortion.
[–]muh-soggy-knee85 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (18 children) | Copy Link
I think perhaps his reasoning is that the law holds two contradictory positions on the status of a fetus.
If the woman wants to kill it, it's not a person, and killing it is legal. If the man wants to kill it, it is a person, which is a fundamental requirement for the offense of murder. And killing it is therefore illegal.
I don't think anyone is advocating whether either is an ethical thing to do, but his reasoning (as I interpreted it anyway) is logical.
[+]frisch85 -30 points-29 points-28 points 7 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
While true we also have to take into account that if a woman decides to get an abortion it's something that she's doing to her own body while punching her is assault.
That's also why I posted a better comparison. If you knock up a chick and she's getting pregnant because of it, that's a consequence you have to take into account and if you cannot live with these consequences you should take pre-measurements, e.g. the vasectomy as I mentioned or using a different type of birth control and even then there's a small chance shit can hit the fan and you've got to deal with it. If a woman would sue me because I got a vasectomy, she can go to hell, it's my choice. If your S/O or your wife would want to sue you because you want a vasectomy, she can go to hell too because such a relationship ain't healthy.
I posted a comment regarding gender inequality yesterday where I was mentioning the law and yes, we men are at a disadvantage when it comes to the law in many areas but as long as these things aren't sorted out, we gotta plan ahead and by 'we' I mean everyone.
[–]BurntBacn 29 points30 points31 points 7 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
here's the thing, it's not about the assault, that's not what they get charged for. They'd be charged with murder, which is the issue, as it isn't considered murder when the woman does it, only the man.
[+]frisch85 -28 points-27 points-26 points 7 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
So you're saying that someone who's punching a pregnant woman which will result in the fetus dying should only be charged with assault?
Abortion is a choice, getting beaten up isn't, that's the difference.
[–]iamgod-_- 28 points29 points30 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You not getting the point
[–]Jex117 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Deliberately so. They're consciously feigning ignorance to avoid facing their biases and preconceived notions.
[–][deleted] 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[+]frisch85 -14 points-13 points-12 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I think the whole discussion derailed because how moronic the first comment was phrased.
How's the law if the woman would punch herself which would result in the fetus being killed? Is that murder? If not then it should be.
I'm not an expert when it comes to abortion but if I'm not mistaken, there's a somewhat psychological judgement whether the woman is allowed to abort or not.
As for abortion itself, my opinion as long as it doesn't have a consciousness it's fine which is also why there's a limited time where abortion is allowed.
[–]GipsyKing79 18 points19 points20 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
You've been besides the point this whole comment thread. It seems to me that you're so deeply engrained with your worldview that you cannot perceive what those people are trying to say. You keep going around the main point trying to shift the focus on other things rather than the main point. Try reading it again in a more objective manner and see for yourself.
The initial point was that if a woman gets an abortion is totally fine if a man kills an unborn baby he is charged with homicide. Homicide requires the thing that was killed to be a human being. So if you kill a human being you are charged with homicide. If the unborn baby is nit considered to be a human being than the man shouldn't be charged with homicide. If the unborn baby is a human being then a woman that has an abortion should be charged with homicide. The law shouldn't have two separate definitions for the same case.
Hope this helps.
[–]Rebel_Scum_This 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
r/densemotherfuckers
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Again your strawmaning so hard here.
[–]grandmasbroach 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You aren't understanding this. You are so tied up in "assault" and "women" in the same sentence you literally can't think straight beyond that. Pretty sad... It is an exercise in logic, as is done in philosophy all the time. It seems to simply be above you. You aren't getting it, plain and simple.
[–]Bugdog81 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
This is about how a woman can decide to kill the baby and it’s not a human being killed but if the man punches her and kills it it’s murder and not just assault. He’s saying the law needs to choose whether or not the baby is human or not. He’s not saying women shouldn’t be able to sue their husbands over vasectomies
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Dude don’t feed into this person, they should learn logical fallacies before starting debate class.
[+]frisch85 -8 points-7 points-6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So you're saying that someone who's punching a pregnant woman which will result in the fetus dying should only be charged with assault? Abortion is a choice, getting beaten up isn't, that's the difference.
see
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah nice strawman. were not denying it’s assault.
[–]Jex117 26 points27 points28 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Punching someone and killing a newborn by doing so is a completely different thing than getting an abortion.
It's obviously different than having an actual abortion, but the outcome is the same.
Even if it's by accident, if I'm held at-fault for a car accident that caused the loss of a pregnancy, I would be charged with "causing the death of an unborn child" whereas abortion holds no such charges.
[+]BricarbonateOfSoda -10 points-9 points-8 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Dude...
[–]Jex117 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
To clarify, I'm not against abortion - if anything I think it should be cheaper and more available.
I'm just pointing out the double standard. Terminating a pregnancy isn't homicide.
[–]BricarbonateOfSoda -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Oh shit, I just realized where I was posting. I was thinking "why is no-one even considering the matter of consent?" If I cut off my finger, that's cool right? No-ones business but mine. But if you you cut off my finger, force me to cut off my finger or are involved in an accident that results in the loss of my finger then you are to blame!
[–]Twofacejay 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Except I didn't help create your finger or gonna be on the hook for taking care of your finger for the next 18+ if it makes it.
[–]PragmaticPlaya 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If any white male wants to pull a "Freaky Friday" and swap my black male identity for your white male identity DM a brotha!
[–]AskingToFeminists -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link
The fetus either is a human, and terminating it is murder, or it isn't human and terminating it isnt murder
The issue isn't whether it is human or not.
Abortion, from a moral perspective, is an issue of conflicting rights. A human has no right to be hooked up on another human without that person's consent, even if it's survival depends on it, and even if that person first agreed to it. You don't have the right to harvest organs, even if it would cost you your life not to. You don't have rights to abduct someone and use them as a dialise machine by hooking yourself to their kidneys. And so on.
And if someone did that to you, you would be in your right to ask to be rid of them.
It's a question of body autonomy. Therefore the question of "my body, my choice". And that the person being hooked at you is. Human is completely immaterial to the question. At best, the non-humanity can make it less of a moral dilemma.
Now, imagine that you agreed to be used as a living dialise machine to save the life of someone you care deeply for. If someone comes in and kills that person, then, there is no moral dilemma, no question of rights taking precedence. It is just straight up murder.
Of course, as with many moral dilemmas, many people will have many differing views on the subject. And proponents of one camp or the other will try to make the other look bad while trying to make themselves look good. Ergo "pro life" as if the other is for free murder" and "pro choice" as if the other is pro enslavement. If your idea of the other side is that they are fundamentally bad, evil people, you have fallen prey to propaganda and/or suffer from unnanced thinking.
And if you ever want to be convincing to the other side, you need to be able to make their case just as well as they would, if not better. By that, you can demonstrate that you understand their viewpoint and still defeat it.
Of course, in the case of moral dilemmas, it often end up depending on what you value above all else, and there's no real arguments for that, as everyone has different sensibilities.
So yes, the fœtus is a human being, yes, the abortion kill a human being. No, the woman was almost never completely innocent in the apparition of that human being, and yes, she should bear a part of the responsibility on its existence. And humans have a right to live. - >pro life
But yes, that human beings life is dependant on someone else's, and that process has a tremendous cost on the body and the life of that person. And people have a right to not be used by other human beings. And in all other cases, that right not to be used by other humans trumps even the right to live. - > pro choice.
Whether you feel in this case that one side should be stronger than the other, or vice versa, I can't really blame you. And I won't think that you are some kind of evil person.
Then, of course, there are people that would say that the state really shouldn't regulate these kind of things, and leave each person free to adjudicate where they fall on that issue, nor should they fund it, unless maybe some extreme cases like rape babies, where the dilemma is much more clear cut.
Personally, I prefer the pragmatic approach to the moral one.
[–]Jamez1469 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This was very interesting. I think in one way you hit the mail right on the head. It gave me pause to think, Thanks
[–]AskingToFeminists 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thanks. That was my goal.
[–]grandmasbroach 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Maybe to you it isn't. But, to just write that off immediately with no second thought kind of shows your bias. I am a master degree holding biologist and think it is a human life. Convince me it isn't and I will change to pro choice.
[–]AskingToFeminists 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Did you read what I said beyond the first phrase? I acknowledge that the fœtus is human. I recognize also that it isn't what is debated in the moral dilemma about abortion. Read again what I wrote, without skipping, this time. If I took the time to elaborate, it wasn't in waste, for the fun of it.
[–]grandmasbroach 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Dude, you don't get to invent or be the arbiter of what the "moral debate" is. Some people think it is a human life and murder. You have some crazy hubris/narcissism if you really believe that you, and you alone, get to decide what the debate it about. I hate to break it to you, but you don't.
Oh, I agree that some people think it is about human life and murder. They are called pro-life.
The people who are pro-choice, the reason the question of choice is even there is because of the bodily autonomy question. That is the only way to bring in choice. And for them, the question of whether it is a life/human/murder is only about how much more prevalent bodily autonomy has to be considered.
I don't disagree that there are pro choice people who really just focus on "it's not a life". Unsophisticated thinkers can be found anywhere, especially in echo chambers. And if they try to argue on these grounds, they are playing in the hand of pro lifers, as it's their terms, and they don't even know the good arguments for their sides well. But what I am trying to do here is to steel man each side, not to go for the easy win of being dismissive by ignoring the other's good argument.
[–]fuyukihana -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Would you support a law requiring parents donate organs as possible to their children if they needed it? In many cases not doing so could result in their child's death. They are responsible for bringing their child into the world. Both organ donation and giving birth alters the body and may result in death. We don't have laws in place requiring organ donation from parents in the case that the child will die without it. The circumstances leading up to a child needing this procedure may be entirely similar to those leading to a person seeking an abortion, such as poor potential to care for the child, which is the responsibility of the parent. Is it enough of a distinction that the child has already been born that the parent is no longer required to sacrifice their health and well being to save the life of the child without it being hypocritical to the choice we actively make to prioritize the parent's right to their organs in instances their child needs them to live?
[–]grandmasbroach -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
You're really, really reaching here. They're not the same thing, or even close. You're comparing apples to orange, and I'm not playing hypothetical word salad games so you can justify killing babies.
[–]fuyukihana -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Removing part of your own living tissue, actually.
[–]grandmasbroach -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Go away troll.
One is your own tissue, the other isn't and has unique DNA. Try again troll boy. They're literally, physically, not the same thing.
[–][deleted] 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuyukihana 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You also raise a good point here by bringing up technology: we don't have the technology to make it fair for a man who wants his kid and a woman who wants an abortion. On the reverse, at least there's paper abortions as potential for a solution. But it's absurd to decide the humanity of a fetus based on whether the woman carrying it wants it. If it's a part of her body when she aborts it, it should stay a part of her body when someone else ends up killing it another way.
[–]HickSmith 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Obviously there's an issue." No, it's not really that obvious.
[–]AskingToFeminists -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
bodily autonomy aside
You might want to dodge the bodily autonomy side of things, but it is the crux of the matter. It is the whole reason this is a moral dilemma.
Genitally mutilating children is no big deal, bodily autonomy aside...
That doesn't work that way. You don't get to choose which right you consider or not.
We will eventual have artificial wombs, at which point maybe things get on a more equal footing between the sexes. If she doesn't want the baby and he does, they pull it out, slap it into the artificial womb and then she had to pay child support instead of the other way around.
I totally agree that this is a moral dilemma only so long as our technology limits us.
If the feotus can be extracted and developped safely, the problem disappear, as the woman's right of bodily autonomy is no longer in conflict with the feotus's right to live.
You see that you instinctively understand that the crux of the matter is the conflicting rights?
[–]Jamez1469 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
then the father can raise it without her.
I foresee a lot of newborn wards of the state.
[–]AskingToFeminists -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Indeed. But until then, the bodily autonomy argument stands, and has to be contended with if someone wish to approach the abortion debate on a moral basis.
[–][deleted] 7 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
That a right may take precedence over another in some circumstances doesn't make that other right disappear.
The baby has a right to live. If someone punch the mother in the guts and kills it, it is then murder, clear and simple.
In some circumstances, though, this right enter in conflict with another right. The right of bodily autonomy of the mother. That baby still has the right to live, but there is a conflict. That conflict result in a moral dilemma. Which right takes precedence. Some people think the babies right to live takes precedence. Some people think the mother's right of bodily autonomy takes precedence.
It's kind of like you have a right to swing your fist. People have a right not to be punched. If you swing your fist around, and someone's face is there, there is a conflict of those rights, and one of them takes precedence. In that circumstance, your right to swing your fist is usually judged less important than the right of others not to be punched. Although, centuries ago, a noble had the right to punch a commoner if he so wished. Therefore, there was a time where it was debated whether or not a noble has a right to punch a commoner. Or an owner to punch a slave.
And in the present situation, it looks like most people are convinced that they are the ones on the side of defending the slave, on the right side of history, and that the other side is the monster. Only time will tell.
Everyone has the right to live. You have a right to self defense. If you kill someone in self defense, your right to self defense took precedence over the right to live of the other. That doesn't negate the right to live of everyone in every other circumstances.
If she can kill it for bodily autonomy, then it isn't murder. Thus the bf shouldn't be charged with homicide for attempting to spike her drink with an abortion pill.
If person A can do thing X in circumstance 1, then thing x is not forbidden. Therefore person B can do thing X in circumstance 2.
This is your argument, once the fluffy emotion inducing words are made general and neutral. If the structure is valid, no matter what we plugg in should be valid.
If (person A) I can (do thing X) kill you in (circumstance 1) self defence, then (thing x) killing you is not forbidden. Therefore (person B) my hitman can (do thing X) kill you (in circumstance 2) on my whim.
It appears your structure, when plugged in some other circumstance, gives out a pretty absurd conclusion. Therefore your structure is invalid. Therefore you can't draw the conclusion logically from the premises.
Your conclusion might still be true, but you will need a valid argument to draw it.
Edit: murder is one of the most heinous crimes possible. So bodily autonomy shouldn't trump it.
That is your opinion. Your side of the moral dilemma. But that you feel this way doesn't mean someone else doesn't feel otherwise. You need to realize that this is a moral dilemma, that some people really feel that bodily autonomy should trump the right to live.
If I abduct you and hook you to someone dying to be used as life support, and unplugging you result in the death of the person you are hooked to, do you feel that your bodily autonomy wouldn't trump the right to live of that dying person?
[–]HumblePig -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Good write up. Very reasonable and persuasive.
I try to be. Thanks.
[–]Najd7 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Perhaps" and "should" make this even worse, like it's not even fully clear that there's a problem there!
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Female on male rape has a different dynamic,because usually trickery and power are in play which is really hard to prove. Unfortunately , a penis can't tear; and as long as men are deemed by mainstream society to be the bigger stronger sex, we can always be hit with the line " why did you let that happen?"
[–]ShelSilverstain 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
More stupid??? Even talking about this has never happened in the history of humanity before
[–]anonymousguy3000 272 points273 points274 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
"Perhaps it should be"
So only maybe perhaps in some cases seldomly, forcing sex is rape? Wtf
[–]halomon3000 89 points90 points91 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Your not supposed to give your opinion usually so the author probably agrees but is just using journalistic intergrity.
[–]Najd7 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah it's sort of unacceptable and impolite to rob banks, so you should perhaps stop doing that.
[–]thecomment-guy 33 points34 points35 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
BBC is not allowed to be opinionated, (it often is and pisses me off but strictly speaking it can't hold a view)
[–]oashworth 21 points22 points23 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
yeah but it does and the BBC is a a biased news source for sure (like most though)
[–]thecomment-guy 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Totally agree with you but i guess in this case they are trying to hold onto their integrity
[–]CaptainCanuck15 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Show me an unbiased news source. Cause I'm pretty sure it is impossible to be unbiased.
[–]oashworth 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
True, there are probably no unbiased news sources. As the BBC is publicly funded i think it is supposed to be generally more unbiased than others. However I've found they have strong one sided stances on a range of issues. I tend to take most news with a pinch of salt and if it bothers me enough look into things myself. However that usually isn't that fruitful either. I just try to make my own honest opinion and if i'm wrong then re-evaluate and move on. I think the world would be a better place if we all stopped blindly following everything we see and hear and in stead stop and think about it.
However it is easy to just sit by and choose one news source that agrees with most of your preferences and then just keep reading your news from there which i believe most people do.
[–]BitsAndBobs304 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Just imagine how it'd be writte for a country where it's the opposite..
[–]ST07153902935 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The irony is that the anti male rape laws in California made it so that Brock Turner couldnt be convicted of rape, only sexual assault.
They have since changed the law. Lesson is that you have to have a female victim to change an anti male law.
[–]ysidrow 97 points98 points99 points 7 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
The title and intro are stupid, but the legality is a real problem. Many legal terms in the UK use very old definitions which do preclude equal application of the law. In short, these regions need to update their laws.
[–]MotherFuckin-Oedipus 16 points17 points18 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I mean, we have the same problem in the U.S. pretty frequently, too.
[–]SwiggityStag 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm pretty sure the law on rape is the same in the US, if I'm not mistaken. It seems to be an issue pretty much everywhere.
[–]Shadezyy 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I believe they changed the wording of rape in the US. I think that also affected the legality of it? I'm not entirely sure, but my limited searching seems to also reflect that.
[–]non-troll_account -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
That's simply incorrect. In the US, rape laws are gender neutral. The social views are the problem. In the UK, it's legally impossible for a man to be raped by a woman.
[–]MotherFuckin-Oedipus 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Based on your username I suspect you're just trolling but...
It's true that most states have better language, but many of them have plenty of their own problems, such as excluding a spouse from the definition of rape.
[–]non-troll_account -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
men can only be raped in a very small subset of sexual acts
You mean the single most common kind of rape, prison rape; male on male rape?
Strange way to define "very small subset of sexual acts," but I do admit I have had a tough time understanding English language changes recently.
[–]muh-soggy-knee9 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
I've heard this line of defence before. And at first glance it sounds reasonable.
Until you realise our statute for rape is S1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Two thousand and fucking three.
Let that sink in for a moment.
[–]let_that_sink_in 17 points18 points19 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The hell did that sink come from?
[–]muh-soggy-knee 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Take my upvote you bastard! :P
[–]jameswalker43 -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ok, I see why you can have strong feelings about this issue. Stay strong.
It's almost like no one is reading the massive subheading that says this.
[–]tothecatmobile -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Remember that while forced to penetrate isnt called rape in the UK, it is a crime that has the same sentence as rape.
And generally those who write laws don't care too much about the terms used in law and how the usage of the term changes over time.
[–]jp_mra 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Source? My understanding is that, at best, the woman is charged for sexual assault, which carries a punishment much less than actual rape.
[–]tothecatmobile -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
They would be guilty of causing sexual activity without consent.
For cases where the victim is forced to penetrate either the attacker or another person, the maximum sentence is life, the same as rape.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/4
[–]jp_mra -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Your claim is not correct.
Section 1a specifically states the offender is a 'he'.
Section 4a-d states the victim must be penetrated. A woman lacks a penis to penetrate a man. When a woman rapes a man, the man is not penetrated and therefore does not qualify as a victim.
This is why UK statistics show men are only 5% of rape victims. Because to qualify as a male victim, you must be raped by another man.
[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Your claim is not correct. Section 1a specifically states the offender is a 'he'.
In UK legislation, "he" means any person.
Both (c) and (d) refer to person B (the victim) penetrating another person, this can be, but doesn't have to be person A (the accused)
[–][deleted] 59 points60 points61 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
The best way to compare getting a boner when getting raped is: some women report orgasming during a rape, but still did not enioy it. "Its like when you get tickled. You laugh, but its unsufferable"
[–]industriald85 50 points51 points52 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I’ve heard women say that because you get an erection, it’s not rape because you must be enjoying it.
Very easy to turn that argument around.
[–]DancePower 29 points30 points31 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Some stupid fucking worthless sexist asshole: If you get an erection, it's not rape because you enjoy it.
Me, an intellectual: If you get wet, it's not rape because you enjoy it.
Me: gets ganged up on, beaten, raped, and called a sexist racist misogynistic nazist tpsøgbohfkdldkwmigofpjplofodkzlfeqkøogldofkgbusjghuf
Oh man women are so oppressed
[–]RoryTate 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
An erection is probably closer to "getting wet" than directly comparing it to a female orgasm. Women's bodies also have a similar physiological response to men of increasing blood flow to the region in response to physical contact. Areas of the vulva become "engorged" or "puffy", and can become very red in colour, which is one of the reasons why red lipstick and rouge for cheeks are common beauty products.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Gonna save this comments to shut up feminists.
[–]RoryTate 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I doubt it will actually stop an antagonistic person from continuing to disagree with you, but it is definitely a good argument that will likely convince many who are just lurking/reading. Most people are very familiar with using massage, compression stockings, etc, to increase blood flow/circulation in their bodies, and human genitalia is no exception to that physiological response to physical contact.
[–]teeny_big_tree 31 points32 points33 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Replace "perhaps it" with "it fucking well" and it's a start.
[–]TheDwiin 30 points31 points32 points 7 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
I love it when feminists use the "it isn't about sex it's about power and dominance" argument (which I believe is sometimes the case) but when I start bringing up that women can rape men because it's a power and dominance thing, they backpedal saying that "women wouldn't enjoy the sex without a participating partner so a woman wouldn't rape a man."
[–]jp_mra 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
"it isn't about sex it's about power and dominance"
This is feminist projection. Women use sex to gain power over men, so they assume men think exactly the same. It is women who deny sex to their husband to get what they want, not the other way around.
It never occurs to them that for men who commit rape, it's almost always just lust and a complete lack of empathy for others.
[–]TheDwiin 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
For some rapists it is about dominance, and breaking the other person. Some, not all. Some rapists are just horny, and that goes for both sides of the gender argument.
[–]DownrightCaterpillar 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The power and dominance argument is actually pretty legit, prostitution and masturbation eliminate sexual desire for anybody who is not sadistic or otherwise mentally ill. It's an area where we can find common ground with the (small number of) reasonable feminists.
[–]cup_ofwater 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I disagree, I think most rape is driven by sexual desire in the moment with the thought being somewhere along the lines of "once I get going I'm sure they'll enjoy it, it'll end up as a win-win" or something like that anyway
[–]DownrightCaterpillar 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"once I get going I'm sure they'll enjoy it, it'll end up as a win-win"
This is clearly a mentally ill person. No reasonable person would go even a few seconds beyond considering that thought.
[–]TheDwiin 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I don't disagree, I will add though the vocal minority of feminists are what people think of when they think of feminists. I am aware that feminism in nature, and most of the people would consider themselves feminists do yearn for true equality.
[–][deleted] 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheDwiin 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The vocal minority gives feminism a bad name, and that's why I'm sticking to my original comment. Sure most feminists want true equality, but their voices are drowned out by the radicals screeching how all men should die. The reason why feminism is criticized as such is because not enough sane feminists raise their voices against those radicals, such as those praising that college girl who created that sexist chair.
[–]Brusanan 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Women can commit rape, they're just not capable of lying about something as serious as rape." - Feminists, probably
[–]jp_mra 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The majority of western feminists think women can rape and should be convicted for it.
source?
[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Some Imperialists don't want to be dicks to natives and think the empire spreads positive and good things, ya know, why are you so down on imperialism and acting like those people are rubes who don't understand the inherent problems in it?
No see, the mistreatment of the natives isn't inherent to it, because i'm an imperialist and I don't want to do that, therefore I'm completely right in claiming instituitons *founded on my kind of imperialism* 1. Could exist in reality rather than purely in my imagination 2. Wouldn't immediately fail and 3. Wouldn't be corrupted into the other kind.
[–][deleted] 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why not engage with the substance of the point I made rather than just repeating something I already addressed?
They're not different enough, they all share the same fundamental flaws in their outlook. It just fucks them up to differing degrees and in differing ways.
If you're forced to view the world through a gynocentrist lens, female supremacy is an inevitable outcome. At that point you're just quibbling over the extent and flavor of it, as well as how subtle it is.
[–]RoryTate 60 points61 points62 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Because somehow when genitalia is internal to the human body and unwanted contact is made with it...well, that is just so much more traumatic and hurtful. Unlike external genitalia of any type, where it's like the appendage was just asking to be grabbed and violated, you know? Any man who claims otherwise...anybody who has the audacity to say that contact with his genitals is unwanted is obviously lying, and similarly any protests of distress and pain from him can be safely ignored. It's just not the same thing after all. /s
[–]xXEliteHackerXx 14 points15 points16 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
No, if a female is rubbing up against me, my body will react to that and my brain will definitely send blood to my genitals, but I might not want that. Also, saying that male genitals are just "asking to be grabbed and violated" is honestly incredibly offensive. Like, imagine if it's a little boy and an adult women? Is it not rape because the little boy has a "external genitalia" and so he'll obviously want it? No, that is rape; not only because he is a little kid, but also because rape is rape, no matter the gender. Now, I don't know if you're just baiting or what, but still. Also, i'm only 13 and the fact that even a 13 year old can identify rape in both genders is actually appalling.
[–]Emperorerror 31 points32 points33 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The /s at the end of the comment signifies sarcasm.
[–]xXEliteHackerXx 13 points14 points15 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Oops, thats a woosh for me. Either way, point still stands.
[–]RoryTate 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not everyone has run into a "/s" before, so it's understandable. I did try to make my claims as insane and over the top as possible to be clear it was opposing such an ignorant position, but with Poe's Law and such extreme views becoming so common among that ideological cult...well, that makes sarcasm difficult. And you are right to say how wrong it is and speak up against such repulsive ideas wherever you see them. So no harm no foul.
[–]Hyperionc137 23 points24 points25 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
“asking to be grabbed and violated”, could be said the same for tits
The /s at the end means that he's being sarcastic. 🙂 Very good of you to speak up though.
[–]auMatech 19 points20 points21 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Well, if they want to try and put in place legislation to finally classify it as rape, they should. I wouldn't be surprised if feminists successfully lobby against it like they did in Israel and India.
As someone on here once said, history might not repeat itself, but it sure does rhyme.
[–]DancePower 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In this case, there needs to be a counter-movement (MRA folk) to keep that legistlation there.
[–]TomDaNub3719 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
When did it happened in Israel? I live here and didn’t ever hear of it.
[–]auMatech 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
https://www.jpost.com/Israel/Womens-groups-Cancel-law-charging-women-with-rape
[–]TomDaNub3719 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The law treats women and men as if they are equal, while it is clear that in this case men are more powerful
So men are more powerful whenever it’s convenient?
[–]Gozie5 16 points17 points18 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
They ask stupid questions like these and then they "Pikachu face" when their son gets raped in school by a female teacher.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
“Female teacher forces make student into affair”
[–]Mackowatosc 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
*has an improper relationship with
[–]Lion_amongst_gods 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Of course, it is. That thing in your head that says that it is, is called 'logic'.
[–]feckinghound 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
The law is that it's sexual assault, just like sodomy, objects inserted into vaginas and is gender neutral - actually a far worse crime than rape. Rape is a penis forcibly entering a vagina only.
Plenty lawyers want to see rape scrapped from the law books and only have sexual assault as it covers everything. It's just that rape has made it into the common speech of the public and it's been misconstrued.
The article is wanting rape to be more than just a penis forcibly entering a vagina. Personally I think we should be using sexual assault as the law is already written.
[–]DownrightCaterpillar 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This might be a reasonable take but I think it's worth you making some content (article, video, etc.) explaining it.
[–]DancePower 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Perhaps Sexual Assault Severity should be a thing?
I assume it already is
[–]DancePower 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If it aint then now is a good time to hold some speeches
[–]SageBus 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
When they are the victims, men are regarded in sexual abuse cases as little more than walking dildos that spit out money.
Perhaps.jpg
[–]MisPlacedNeuroBlue 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And theres women fighting against that rape definition!
[–]Jex117 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
https://soundcloud.com/889-wers/male-rape
Theresa Phung: "For the men who are traumatized by their experiences because they were forced against their will to vaginally penetrate a woman.." Dr. Mary P. Koss: "How would that happen...how would that happen by force or threat of force or when the victim is unable to consent? How does that happen?" Theresa Phung: "So I am actually speaking to someone right now. his story is that he was drugged, he was unconscious and when he awoke a woman was on top of him with his penis inserted inside her vagina, and for him that was traumatizing. Dr. Mary P. Koss: "Yeah." Theresa Phung: "If he was drugged what would that be called?" Dr. Mary P. Koss: "What would I call it? I would call it 'unwanted contact'." Theresa Phung: "Just 'unwanted contact' period?" Dr. Mary P. Koss: "Yeah."
Theresa Phung: "For the men who are traumatized by their experiences because they were forced against their will to vaginally penetrate a woman.."
Dr. Mary P. Koss: "How would that happen...how would that happen by force or threat of force or when the victim is unable to consent? How does that happen?"
Theresa Phung: "So I am actually speaking to someone right now. his story is that he was drugged, he was unconscious and when he awoke a woman was on top of him with his penis inserted inside her vagina, and for him that was traumatizing.
Dr. Mary P. Koss: "Yeah."
Theresa Phung: "If he was drugged what would that be called?"
Dr. Mary P. Koss: "What would I call it? I would call it 'unwanted contact'."
Theresa Phung: "Just 'unwanted contact' period?"
https://imgur.com/n4NZfxA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_P._Koss
Famous feminist, Dr Mary P Koss, is widely heralded for petitioning the FBI to change the definition of rape to include male sodomy victims, and widely criticized for deliberately petitioning a definition that excludes male victims of female rapists.
Mary Koss is one of the most famous and influential leaders within the Feminist Movement. Until Feminists start calling out rape apologists in their own ranks, I simply won't trust them.
[–]jp_mra 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Whats her stance on women who rape women?
[–]Juris-Prude 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Because the law is currently unequal. It's not like they're asking it because it is rape and they're suggesting it's not. It's because it's currently classed as sexual assault. While carrying the same sentence, it does not carry the same social stigma.
[–]tw1nm3t30r 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is the sky fucking blue? Rape is Rape, no matter gender age or anything.
[–]daredevilk 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Phenomenon"
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
What if a man forced himself on another man? Is that a rape then?? Or a woman on a woman(since a woman obviously canNoT RapE)???
[–][deleted] 7 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jonne999999999 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So sizzorz isnt rape damn
[–]DancePower 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Let scissoring be rape
[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Woman on woman would only be rape if she penetrates either with her finger or some other object.
Wrong. Rape (in UK) is defined as penetration by a penis. Seriously.
[–]lahavior[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Female on male rape is not defined by law in Isreal as well, the punishment you would get for that crime is half the punishment for male on female rape, i am a man, and i live in Isreal, I'm scared
[–]cup_ofwater 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
damn, you must be one attractive fella-
[–]lahavior[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Got a point, i am not that scared now, thank you
[–]GlossyLB 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I thought that rape wasn't about how attractive you are, it's about power and control, etc,
[–]BudnamedSpud 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thats the point of the article. Its about how its not considered rape in parts of the UK.
[–]DeltaPX 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This is the source: https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-49057533
And the picture is cut. It says: “When a man has penetrative sex with a woman without her consent, that's rape. But what if a woman makes a man have penetrative sex with her, without his consent? That's not rape under the law of England and Wales, but the author of a new study of the phenomenon says perhaps it should be.”
I totally agree that it should also be called rape.
[–]Lui_Le_Diamond 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm 99.9% certain that that is in fact the very definition of rape.
[–]cww7869 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
That’s the same way it is in New York State
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It's a question because feminists fight to ensure male victims cannot be protected.
[–]azazelcrowley 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They fight to ensure no pro-male institutions arise that can threaten their anti-male crusade, then do precisely nothing about mens issues while gaslighting men and saying they support them.
Sort of like if there was a drug legalization lobby group that viciously suppressed any organizations dedicated to illegal immigrant amnesty but when confronted on this said "Oh we support amnesty, you're lying, we support it, why are you lying about us?" and then did precisely nothing about it with all the power they've accumulated, but instead just endlessly tried to get drugs legalized in between bouts of lashing out at organizations trying to secure amnesty.
It's only because they don't explicitly label themselves a womens lobby and gaslight the public instead by claiming to be for both sexes that it isn't more evident to people what they are doing.
[–]my-2econd-account 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
P E R H A P S
[–]MR_9uy 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The article isn't too bad to be honest, it even touches on men being victims of domestic violence. It's worth a read in my opinion.
The biggest take away for me is that it's a article highlighting an issue men face, and it's on the front page of one of the most popular news sites.
[–]hehimCA 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Good point. Even though the headline as written is ridiculous, just the fact that it's being discussed is great. We need more articles on these topics. I'm hoping that it wasn't just a click-baity headline written by an editor.
But in reading the article, it's actually accurate to what's being questioned -- this is not legally rape in many places, which shocks me. How could it not be?
[–]A_one_legged_man 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So if a woman sticks a gun to a man's head and forces him to have sex, that isn't rape? Did he have a choice?
[–]frisch85 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
2024 News Headline: Shocking! "For no plausible reason, all men seem to have left the country" female prime minister of the United Kingdom says
[–]CelticTiger1012 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yup, if a woman rapes a man in England and Wales the most she can be charged with is sexual assault. It’s pretty fucked
[–]camletoejoe 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
IF a woman rapes a man. Is that rape? DERP!
Apparently not in UK. Wow, I know the laws are skewed, but I didn't realize there are this bad!
[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I hope one day people will look back on these "men, can they really be raped" articles the way we look back on "the negro, can it truly feel pain" discussions.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well, at least they are getting aware of it :/
[–]boringcarpets 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's crazy how they can't get their heads around, yknow, equality. Treating men and women the same is baffling
[–]SMGcraycray 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If I force someone to kill themselves is that murder
[–]Lethn 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is just yet more moral gatekeeping from feminists, because they always view men as the abusers, they won't ever admit they can be raped by a woman. They'll rant about men all day and about how men can rape other men, but that again goes back to their ideology of how only men can be abusers.
These people must be isolated from the criminal justice system and psychology industry, they have had control for far too long and are enabling abusive women. By the way, this is the thing about feminists too who claim 'We don't hate men' no, they don't, they might genuinely believe that, but they will always view men as potential abusers and rapists even if they don't openly 'hate' them the way a lot of feminists in the mainstream do.
Don't let them get away with all this sneaky wordplay and mental gymnastics.
[–]chambertlo 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Perhaps it should be
This is shit. Of course it should be.
[–]I-have-ED 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
how is this even a question
You’re not just wrong, you’re stupid
[–]CantBanFacts 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
This question isn't even being asked over here across the pond.
Bringing this up gets you called a nazi-rapist.
[–]talantua 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Don't wanna be a dick over this but i feel compelled to ask. Are you suggesting you don't want to bring up the topic under the fear of receiving the, under my understanding, assumed reaction?
[–]CantBanFacts 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Not fear of the reaction, fear of the socioeconomic consequences of what follows. Once was enough, thank you.
[–]talantua 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Ah. I don't know what happened to you but you look like you are speaking from experience.
I admire your courage and I am sorry for what i assume happened to you
[–]CantBanFacts 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I appreciate your empathy.
[–]goodmod[M] 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Although this is a good post, the title does not say enough about its subject. This forces people to click and read before they can decide whether they are interested. It also makes searching impossible.
If everyone did this, the subreddit would become unusable. Moreover, it means that your post will fail to reach some readers because they won't know what it's about.
So please don't do it in future. Take the time to describe your link, and save the time of hundreds of other people.
When making a title, it's best to assume the reader doesn't know what you're talking about - but don't go overboard with every detail. Then check if there are any words you can cut out without losing any important information.
[–]rozz121 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wtf
[–]NibblyPig 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
As per a petition to the UK government
All non-consensual sexual penetration is dealt with by specific serious offences, including those that can be committed by a man or a woman. For example, the offence of assault by penetration carries the same maximum penalty as rape. The sentences available under the Act for all sexual offences are significant and reflect the seriousness of the offending. Issues surrounding the definition of rape were considered both in the “Setting the Boundaries” consultation published prior to the introduction of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and, during the passage of that legislation through Parliament. In the consultation there was a considerable amount of agreement that rape should remain an offence of penile penetration, but that the definition be extended to include penile penetration of the mouth. It is true that “rape” under Section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is, in the majority of cases, committed by a man, but there are some rare exceptions for example, when a woman is actively involved in the commission of a gang rape. We therefore have no plans to amend the legal definition of rape in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 as suggested by this e-petition. Ministry of Justice
All non-consensual sexual penetration is dealt with by specific serious offences, including those that can be committed by a man or a woman. For example, the offence of assault by penetration carries the same maximum penalty as rape.
The sentences available under the Act for all sexual offences are significant and reflect the seriousness of the offending.
Issues surrounding the definition of rape were considered both in the “Setting the Boundaries” consultation published prior to the introduction of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and, during the passage of that legislation through Parliament. In the consultation there was a considerable amount of agreement that rape should remain an offence of penile penetration, but that the definition be extended to include penile penetration of the mouth.
It is true that “rape” under Section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is, in the majority of cases, committed by a man, but there are some rare exceptions for example, when a woman is actively involved in the commission of a gang rape.
We therefore have no plans to amend the legal definition of rape in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 as suggested by this e-petition.
Ministry of Justice
[–]neoalfa 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Perhaps...
[–]Dalinair 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There are many things i'm proud about living in the UK, this is not one of them, we are still backward on way too many things.
[–]Pompeyfandan 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Under UK law this is called sexual assault. It's not called rape, but it carries the exact same penalties and sentencing guidelines, so really it's just a matter of terminology.
[–]Mackowatosc 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not the same social stigma tho.
[–]xmx900 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Isn't it already a thing in the us though?
Only in a few states
[–]iMnotHiigh 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
2019 clown world
Why do we even need to talk about this?? Of course it’s rape!
[–]miroku000 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
We do need to talk about it because in many/most places it is not in fact rape (at least not under the legal definition of rape.) The reason we are discussing it is that many people think that such places should change their laws so that it is considered rape.
[–]Flowmeyo 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
perhaps
[–]alabamaispoor 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Can someone please provide me with the link?
[–]jackcos 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-49057533
[–]MopFish 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
technically in the UK its sexual assault if a women forces a man but it does have the exact same punishment, though it kinda fucked
In my book, ethically, it always has been.
"Phenomenon."
Like it happens so rarely that it really isn't worth considering in a data set.
[–]scootmcdoot 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The.... "phenomenon?"
[–]GJokaero 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's not but under UK law women cannot be rapists due to how the law is worded.
[–]Lil_Narwhal 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wtf of course that's rape. I didnt know that was a thing in england...
[–]Ya-boi-alphape 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Great. There’s some great discussion about this subject happening then someone has to swing in abortion. Can we please stay on topic?
[–]_Mellex_ 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kitsunemitsu 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I was raped before. Not proud of it, don't often admit it and I still kind of blame myself.
The title literally implies it like omg
[–]GetJukedM8 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes because raping of men doesn't happen. "Phenomenon" fucking hell
[–]Dikklol 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Perhaps
[–]Shitpostradamus 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Just another case of that damned patriarchy!!
[–]randomhappydinosaur 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
ftfy
[–]LunaTheNightmare 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Uh yah! Rape is rape!!
[–]ChaosOpen 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
People seem to think that because men like sex, they must like sex with everyone so there is no way they would turn down a woman's advances, however, even though women like sex as well, for some reason they think only women have the ability to control their libido.
Or they think that forcing someone to have sex can only be done through physical means, however, it is very possible to use blackmail to accomplish it. I'm sure the line "have sex with me or I'll tell everyone you raped me" has been spoken to many victims.
[–]SharedRegime 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Perhaps it should be" its like they dont know what the definition of rape is.
But yeah we live in a patriarchy for sure.
full article link?
[–]facemoosh 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Perhaps.
[–]-paulpawlowski- 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK
[–]princeflare 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why is it even a question? Because some women still believe that only men commit rape.
"Perhaps" it should be. Only perhaps?
“Oh you’re a guy, you know you wanted it anyway”
“You probably liked it so what’s the big deal?”
[–]fuyukihana 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Damn I saw a post recently in a women's discussion subreddit from a man asking if he'd been raped, describing this sort of situation. The responses were resoundingly "yes, that is rape." Many recommendations on how to deal with the trauma and empathy for the lack of resources available for men to do so. If a bunch of women on a female centric subreddit understand this, what the fuck is wrong with those who dont? Who are these people so certain it isn't?
[–]goldhelmet 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No shit Sherlocks.
[–]TwinkieMayhem24 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Happened to me, I keep quiet about it now because the few that I told laughed and said that men cant be raped.
[–]EathanS2k 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Good thing the article says England and Wales and not the UK, Scots law is different from English law and in an updated definition of rape in the sexual offences Scotland act 2009 the rape of males has been included.
[–]ThreeLF 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
baby steps. baby steps. This article isn't discriminatory. I may not like the wording, and you probably don't either, but it's at least a good thing that the general public is discussing it.
[–]Egalitarianwhistle 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
if a woman has ever had sex with you after youve had two beers then you have been raped.
[–]hatrickpatrick 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why the fuck does the word "penetration" have to be involved at all? Rape is engaging in any form of sexual intercourse with another human without their consent. Why can't we just define it thus and leave it at that?
[–]medi3val6 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Unpopular opinion: They are both still rapes, but I do think being penetrated is a more severe version. Like assault and aggravated-assault, or something.
[–]SporkTornado 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
UK's legal definition of rape is so narrow, a woman can't commit rape.
Rape (1)A person (A) commits an offence if— (a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis, (b)B does not consent to the penetration, and (c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents. (2)Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents. (3)Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section. (4)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.
Rape
(1)A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b)B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
(2)Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.
(3)Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section.
(4)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape
[–]talantua 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Here is a link to the article
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/stories-49057533
Personally i like this article. I've known for years about the situation. This is one of the biggest things that made me aware of the unbalance in many social and legal system.
I think it is a good thing that the question is still being asked as it forces people be aware and the fact that a big enterprise as BBC is the one publishing it, today i might add, is a good thing.
We WANT the question to be asked, we WANT people to talk about it. The worst thing would be for it to become ignored or worse, forgotten, and we'd be back to the starting point.
Real change happens overtime, not overnight, and people forget, new generations might not be aware. This is the one thing i'm aware feminism or any big social entott did right, no matter their intentions or results. They hammered their point, right or wrong, until it became the standard.
So do it, talk about it, let people know but be respectful. Just don't let it die or change won't ever happen.
[–]Guilvareux1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
The author of a study?! Are you joking?! This is common fucking sense
You'd be surprised how many studies and discoveries are just "common sense" noticed and put on paper. Does that make them any less relevant?
i was raped by a woman and to this day everyone thinks it’s hilarious, and that it want rape because women can’t do that. police, friends, family all think it was nothing
[–]OrionTheWolf 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It’s because we don’t have reproductive rights
[–]wwwhistler 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
why?...a possable clue behind the reason can be found in the victorian laws against homosexual behavior. it was illegal for male gay sex but not female gay sex...why? because Victoria the Queen, did not believe that women engaged in such behavior and therefor no such law was needed.
[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
I know it's a fucking ball-ache, but my fellow UK users could do our movement a solid here by clicking the link to "The Next Episode", her podcast hosted on the BBC website. They'll then prompt you to sign up to the BBC website to access it.
I know, I know, I clicked away too, because why would you sign up to the BBC website compared to using the IPlayer, well it turns out, for shit that's too thrown together in the back of a garage to make it onto the Iplayer like ms silvers podcast, my guess being they allow people to host their content there or have some kind of fucked up employee contract forcing them to do it there instead of on youtube or something, probably based on the vain hope that the BBC can reap 100% of the viewership from hosting it on the website and get more influence than having to credit youtube and reach a potential audience millions larger in a typical BBC move. But here's the thing. If their data collection is even halfway competent, they'll show a spike in registrations specifically being linked from this podcast on this topic. Read the article, click the link to her podcast, press play, get cockblocked, Sign up, watch or listen to the podcast, and then you're done forever, or you can just let it sit there in case this kind of thing comes up again.
There's nothing a company likes more than new customers, and if a story generates new membership on their website that's going to get them interested in publishing more of this kind of thing in order to keep that membership and potentially expand it.
[–]Clown_molester69 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Perhaps it should be. Well no shit
[–]ibelieveinsantacruz 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How's he to keep his dick hard if he doesn't want to?
[–]AssassinTable 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"perhaps it should be" ~ Humanity - 2019
[–]Rustythepipe 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Good lord.
[–]LurkingGinger1988 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Consent? What’s that? Oh yeah. Something only women need according to UK law. This is why my ex wasn’t charged with it and this is why I have a daughter now.
The law needs to change and move towards a more equal sentence.
[–]RandommCraft 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I might get downvoted for this butttt.
The question itself it somewhat relevant. Depending on your jurisdiction, rape only counts if the person 'inserts or penetrates the other person'
The law needs to be updated, yes.
The article is somewhat bias, yes.
But it has a good point. Please don't dismiss things straight away.
'biased', not 'bias'
[–]thuglanta 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]memescauseautism 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]retardedwhiteknight -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
england is still in stone age
[–]AnonymousChezz -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
“Perhaps should be.” Digusting
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Disgusting this means a 40 year old women can force a teen for sex and not be charged with rape
[–]r8001 -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Perhaps".
[+]jackcos -6 points-5 points-4 points 7 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Did you actually read the article, or just the title?
It's actually really positive, dispelling many of the myths such as "if a man has an erection then he wants sex". The study was carried out by a woman, and now she's advocating for a change to the law.
But no, you just read the clickbait headline.
EDIT: Why am I getting downvoted? The article does dispel the myth that men can't be raped. It's not dismissive like the title suggests at all.
If women is wet,does that mean she wanted to get raped?
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–][deleted] 291 points292 points293 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 76 points77 points78 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]SSininkas 23 points24 points25 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 34 points35 points36 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LandMineHare 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]throwawayaway929292 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ZombieInferno6 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]Alter-P 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jamez1469 -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Alter-P 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]rahsoft 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SSininkas 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]throwawayaway929292 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]epalsliphead 484 points485 points486 points (61 children) | Copy Link
[–]Passivefamiliar 27 points28 points29 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuyukihana 9 points10 points11 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Passivefamiliar 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuyukihana 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Passivefamiliar 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 84 points85 points86 points (52 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuyukihana 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]frisch85 21 points22 points23 points (25 children) | Copy Link
[–]muh-soggy-knee85 points [recovered] (18 children) | Copy Link
[+]frisch85 -30 points-29 points-28 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]BurntBacn 29 points30 points31 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[+]frisch85 -28 points-27 points-26 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]iamgod-_- 28 points29 points30 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Jex117 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[+]frisch85 -14 points-13 points-12 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]GipsyKing79 18 points19 points20 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rebel_Scum_This 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]grandmasbroach 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Bugdog81 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]frisch85 -8 points-7 points-6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jex117 26 points27 points28 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]BricarbonateOfSoda -10 points-9 points-8 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jex117 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]BricarbonateOfSoda -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Twofacejay 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PragmaticPlaya 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists -2 points-1 points0 points (23 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jamez1469 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]grandmasbroach 1 point2 points3 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]grandmasbroach 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuyukihana -2 points-1 points0 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]grandmasbroach -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuyukihana -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]grandmasbroach -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]grandmasbroach -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuyukihana 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HickSmith 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists -2 points-1 points0 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jamez1469 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists -2 points-1 points0 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HumblePig -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Najd7 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ShelSilverstain 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]anonymousguy3000 272 points273 points274 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]halomon3000 89 points90 points91 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Najd7 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thecomment-guy 33 points34 points35 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]oashworth 21 points22 points23 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]thecomment-guy 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CaptainCanuck15 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]oashworth 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BitsAndBobs304 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ST07153902935 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ysidrow 97 points98 points99 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]MotherFuckin-Oedipus 16 points17 points18 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]SwiggityStag 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Shadezyy 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]non-troll_account -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]MotherFuckin-Oedipus 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]non-troll_account -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]muh-soggy-knee9 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]let_that_sink_in 17 points18 points19 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]muh-soggy-knee 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]jameswalker43 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tothecatmobile -3 points-2 points-1 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]jp_mra 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]tothecatmobile -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]jp_mra -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 59 points60 points61 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]industriald85 50 points51 points52 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DancePower 29 points30 points31 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RoryTate 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]RoryTate 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]teeny_big_tree 31 points32 points33 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheDwiin 30 points31 points32 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]jp_mra 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]TheDwiin 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DownrightCaterpillar 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]cup_ofwater 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DownrightCaterpillar 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheDwiin 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheDwiin 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Brusanan 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jp_mra 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RoryTate 60 points61 points62 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]xXEliteHackerXx 14 points15 points16 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Emperorerror 31 points32 points33 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]xXEliteHackerXx 13 points14 points15 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]RoryTate 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Hyperionc137 23 points24 points25 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]auMatech 19 points20 points21 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]DancePower 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TomDaNub3719 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]auMatech 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]TomDaNub3719 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Gozie5 16 points17 points18 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mackowatosc 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lion_amongst_gods 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]feckinghound 10 points11 points12 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]DownrightCaterpillar 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DancePower 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]cup_ofwater 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DancePower 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SageBus 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MisPlacedNeuroBlue 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jex117 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]jp_mra 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Juris-Prude 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tw1nm3t30r 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]daredevilk 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jonne999999999 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DancePower 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]lahavior[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]cup_ofwater 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]lahavior[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]GlossyLB 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BudnamedSpud 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DeltaPX 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Lui_Le_Diamond 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]cww7869 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]azazelcrowley 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]my-2econd-account 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MR_9uy 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]hehimCA 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]A_one_legged_man 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]frisch85 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CelticTiger1012 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]camletoejoe 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]hehimCA 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]boringcarpets 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SMGcraycray 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lethn 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]chambertlo 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]I-have-ED 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CantBanFacts 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]talantua 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]CantBanFacts 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]talantua 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]CantBanFacts 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]goodmod[M] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]rozz121 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NibblyPig 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]neoalfa 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dalinair 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Pompeyfandan 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mackowatosc 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]xmx900 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]iMnotHiigh 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]miroku000 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Flowmeyo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]alabamaispoor 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]jackcos 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MopFish 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]scootmcdoot 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]GJokaero 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lil_Narwhal 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ya-boi-alphape 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]_Mellex_ 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kitsunemitsu 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]GetJukedM8 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dikklol 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Shitpostradamus 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]randomhappydinosaur 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LunaTheNightmare 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ChaosOpen 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SharedRegime 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]facemoosh 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]-paulpawlowski- 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]princeflare 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuyukihana 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]goldhelmet 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TwinkieMayhem24 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EathanS2k 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThreeLF 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Egalitarianwhistle 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]hatrickpatrick 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]medi3val6 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SporkTornado 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]talantua 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Guilvareux1 points [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]talantua 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]OrionTheWolf 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]wwwhistler 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Clown_molester69 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ibelieveinsantacruz 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AssassinTable 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rustythepipe 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LurkingGinger1988 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RandommCraft 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thuglanta 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]memescauseautism 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]retardedwhiteknight -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AnonymousChezz -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]r8001 -3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]jackcos -6 points-5 points-4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link