THESHADOWBOX.NET

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Want some free music? Most of AFP's discography (as well as The Dolls, side-projects, and more) is available for free+donation on Bandcamp

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8  All   Go Down

Author Topic: SlutWalks  (Read 17396 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Agonistes

  • discocunt
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 4289
    • blog
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #60 on: July 13, 2011, 12:37:26 PM »

oh indeed anything i have said has been expressing a point of view and is in no way meant to be an attack on the views of other SB members...more a gentle dismantling of those who's ideas are wrong (ie not mine) the uniform says it all in it's very name.. it is about making people conform to a uniform appearance and by inference a uniform pattern of behaviour....in institutions it is arguable that this is generally positive but when the idea of uniform starts creeping into the laws of evryday life, one has to start seriously worrying....If how a woman dresses can be usedd in law to dismiss a rape trial then we have a serious problem

I don't think it will go this far.  Children are bound by a lot of laws, whether they know it or not.  They can't leave the school premises during teaching hours without a parent/teacher permission, because the school is legally responsible for them, for example.  That doesn't mean the law will eventually govern where adults go during the day - to a higher degree than they do already, which is minimal unless you're a felon.  

Your last statement is interesting.  I don't think this will ever be the case.  If a defence lawyer brought up that she was dressing provocatively, and that was why she got raped - any court would interpret that to be suggesting she wanted to be raped, and that kind of shit the court looks down on and is shocked by.  As it stands, from the rape case law I've studied, the court does not let rapists off easily.  There has to be buckets of evidence towards an alibi or an alternate suspect for a rapist to get away with it, or at least have his charge reduced to another sexual assault.  In a world where you can get banged up for shooting an intruder, it seems likely that the plaintiff is receiving more blame for attacks that take place, but people are starting to stand up against this.  I think it can only get farther away from the woman being blamed for her dress when it comes to rape.
it has been brought up time and again in american rape trials, the woman's dress the night of the alleged rape, so to speak.  especially in date rape and frat rape trials, and the like.  they will even take the actual clothes and pass one's knickers around the room.  the FIRST thing they do is find out what she was wearing, so the prosecution can turn it onto the victim.  a few years back a very famous rape trial tried to prove the victim was a prostitute (she was a student).  don't think everything that can be done to unsupport the defendant doesn't get done over here; american lawyers are dicks.

it isn't unusual for diaries, witnesses, whole lists of sexual partners through one's life, can be called into question.
Logged

Mockery

  • Frank L. Baum's past bride and Oz princess
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3621
  • Lovely, lovely lady lumps
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #61 on: July 13, 2011, 12:55:37 PM »

hold on ...you can legally have sex with a 13 year old in the US?

Hang on, that cannot be right at all. That's still considered pedophilia. Even if the parents gave consent, it would still be illegal.
Logged
was too busy looking at the attractive girl in the weird paint vag bib.

I have 47 Indja Points

tanqgirl

  • honest to god i will break your heart, tear you to pieces and rip you apart
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3046
  • i fell apart, but got back up again
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #62 on: July 13, 2011, 03:44:50 PM »

as far as i know in the us the age can change from state to state but technically you become "legal" somewhere between 16-18 (like i said depending on the state)

but i also know that even if a parent say's it's ok for a 13 year old to have sex with someone that they can get in a shit load of trouble...

for example, the hubz lived by many refugees and went to school with them. one of the guys he knew (from his mother's work) was about 40ish and had been married in his country to his wife who was about 12 (and yes where they came from that is acceptable and is the norm) someone here found out about it and made it into a huge issue and that guy got deported for it, so no even if a parent said ok, it's not legally ok here in the us....

hubz just also said as far as sex with minors go, sex between a 16-17 is ok, as long as they both consent, but legally once you hit 18 you're only legally supposed to have sex with people 18 and older (idk if that is a whole country thing or a state thing though)
Logged

lentower

  • if you see me at a show (or elsewhere), please come over & say hi
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 10433
  • this is a real photo of me. thanks sheri hausey!
    • len's web sight
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #63 on: July 13, 2011, 05:15:49 PM »

hold on ...you can legally have sex with a 13 year old in the US?

Hang on, that cannot be right at all. That's still considered pedophilia. Even if the parents gave consent, it would still be illegal.

in all 46 states, 4 commonwealths, the independent Indian Reservations, Puerto Rico, & the
territories?
Logged
getting started:
BOX-RULES (please read...

further back:
Our forum before this one...

CeeGBee

  • Too o-o-old to rock & ro-o-oll, but too young to die...
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18563
    • Facebook, website, what's the dif?
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #64 on: July 13, 2011, 07:02:58 PM »

Also, why is the other thread locked? Is it just because there's two threads?

yes

excerpt from BOX-RULES (please read before posting)
-Now, onto the rules. First and foremost: Please make sure you're not posting something that's been adressed already/old "news". If you're a new user or you haven't been on The Box in a few days, just take a second to see what the current threads are. When in doubt, PLEASE USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION. There's a lot of information on this board and it's very likely somebody's already asked your question before. The search button is your friend.
Humblest apologies, Ms. Indja, for locking your thread, but this was was here first,
and since they were both about-equally utilised, this one got preference.

It had nothing to do with the revealing low-cut blouse your thread was wearing.   :o
Logged
Is it bad that what she said made perfect sense to me?

Indja

  • wants my
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16282
  • Go, Joe, GO!
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #65 on: July 13, 2011, 09:07:19 PM »

Also, why is the other thread locked? Is it just because there's two threads?

yes

excerpt from BOX-RULES (please read before posting)
-Now, onto the rules. First and foremost: Please make sure you're not posting something that's been adressed already/old "news". If you're a new user or you haven't been on The Box in a few days, just take a second to see what the current threads are. When in doubt, PLEASE USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION. There's a lot of information on this board and it's very likely somebody's already asked your question before. The search button is your friend.
Humblest apologies, Ms. Indja, for locking your thread, but this was was here first,
and since they were both about-equally utilised, this one got preference.

It had nothing to do with the revealing low-cut blouse your thread was wearing.   :o

Whatever, chauvinist pig.
Logged

Mockery

  • Frank L. Baum's past bride and Oz princess
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3621
  • Lovely, lovely lady lumps
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #66 on: July 13, 2011, 09:54:35 PM »

as far as i know in the us the age can change from state to state but technically you become "legal" somewhere between 16-18 (like i said depending on the state)

but i also know that even if a parent say's it's ok for a 13 year old to have sex with someone that they can get in a shit load of trouble...

for example, the hubz lived by many refugees and went to school with them. one of the guys he knew (from his mother's work) was about 40ish and had been married in his country to his wife who was about 12 (and yes where they came from that is acceptable and is the norm) someone here found out about it and made it into a huge issue and that guy got deported for it, so no even if a parent said ok, it's not legally ok here in the us....

hubz just also said as far as sex with minors go, sex between a 16-17 is ok, as long as they both consent, but legally once you hit 18 you're only legally supposed to have sex with people 18 and older (idk if that is a whole country thing or a state thing though)

See? That's what I'm saying. The only way a 13 year old could actually have sex with someone older than them would if the parents gave consent.
Logged
was too busy looking at the attractive girl in the weird paint vag bib.

I have 47 Indja Points

tanqgirl

  • honest to god i will break your heart, tear you to pieces and rip you apart
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3046
  • i fell apart, but got back up again
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #67 on: July 13, 2011, 10:24:43 PM »

actually i think technically if a parent were to let their 13 year old (in america) have sex it would be considered child endangerment and the parents would get into trouble
Logged

The Angel Raliel

  • ...looked the other way when a third of them fell
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 7620
  • ...devourer of scones
    • Raliel Art
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #68 on: July 14, 2011, 05:34:06 AM »

legal age of consent is 16 here so you can have sex with anyone you like at that age..but you cannot drink and you cannot watch porn
Logged
One should always be a little improbable.

@raliel

Mockery

  • Frank L. Baum's past bride and Oz princess
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3621
  • Lovely, lovely lady lumps
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #69 on: July 14, 2011, 12:18:00 PM »

actually i think technically if a parent were to let their 13 year old (in america) have sex it would be considered child endangerment and the parents would get into trouble
That's a good point.

I think that if a parent let their kids have sex, then there is something wrong. The only way it would be okay if it was some religion. That's the only way I'd give it a semi-okay.
Logged
was too busy looking at the attractive girl in the weird paint vag bib.

I have 47 Indja Points

Agonistes

  • discocunt
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 4289
    • blog
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #70 on: July 14, 2011, 12:45:39 PM »

actually i think technically if a parent were to let their 13 year old (in america) have sex it would be considered child endangerment and the parents would get into trouble
That's a good point.

I think that if a parent let their kids have sex, then there is something wrong. The only way it would be okay if it was some religion. That's the only way I'd give it a semi-okay.
if someone is marrying off (or pimping) their thirteen-year-old for their religion, i think that's a good argument that their religion doesn't need to be allowed.
Logged

Mockery

  • Frank L. Baum's past bride and Oz princess
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3621
  • Lovely, lovely lady lumps
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #71 on: July 14, 2011, 01:07:24 PM »

actually i think technically if a parent were to let their 13 year old (in america) have sex it would be considered child endangerment and the parents would get into trouble
That's a good point.

I think that if a parent let their kids have sex, then there is something wrong. The only way it would be okay if it was some religion. That's the only way I'd give it a semi-okay.
if someone is marrying off (or pimping) their thirteen-year-old for their religion, i think that's a good argument that their religion doesn't need to be allowed.

Ah, Ag! You always make such good points!
Logged
was too busy looking at the attractive girl in the weird paint vag bib.

I have 47 Indja Points

Agonistes

  • discocunt
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 4289
    • blog
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #72 on: July 14, 2011, 01:18:38 PM »

i dunno how good a point that is, i mean i'm not really about banning religion of course.  except i'd like to abolish it, because even at its root it hurts people, but i'd like it to sort of abolish itself, and it's not doing that fast enough to suit me.  so you could say, like you could about most everything else, that i have both/conflicting opinions on the subject.


i'm pretty clear about not pushing your thirteen-year-old out there for sex, however.  i don't know a lot of 13 yo girls, period, but the ones i do know seem to have other problems to worry about without adding the horrors of sex to that list.


i'm thinking that sixteen is the age of consent here, too, but if you're over eighteen and you have sex with someone who is sixteen, you are still in danger of statutory rape charges.  of course, it's hard to know because stuff like that varies from state to state, also; the only hard and fast age rules in the us are drinking, voting, military enlistment, and giving blood.
Logged

Dejah Thoris

  • Don't know what I want but I know how to get it
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 204
  • evolution is coming
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #73 on: July 14, 2011, 01:38:04 PM »

hold on ...you can legally have sex with a 13 year old in the US? that is utterly stupid........

Seriously, you got this from the law I quoted?  It says that anyone (meaning ANYONE) who has sexual penetration (of any type or description) with anyone UNDER the age of 13 is guilty of Criminal Sexual Conduct First Degree.  Period.  How did you get that you can legally have sex with a 13-year-old from that?  Ages 13-16 is also a first degree offense if penetration is accomplished through one or more of the circumstances listed.  There are other degrees of CSC.  For example, a 17-year-old having consensual sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend is a third degree offense.  Sexual touching (non-penetration) is second degree if the victim is underaged and fourth degree (a misdemeanor) if the victim is 16 or older. 




See? That's what I'm saying. The only way a 13 year old could actually have sex with someone older than them would if the parents gave consent.
actually i think technically if a parent were to let their 13 year old (in america) have sex it would be considered child endangerment and the parents would get into trouble
That's a good point.

I think that if a parent let their kids have sex, then there is something wrong. The only way it would be okay if it was some religion. That's the only way I'd give it a semi-okay.

Not only would the parent get in trouble for child endangerment and/or risk having their child removed from their home, but, depending on the circumstances, the parent could be charged with criminal sexual conduct as well.  And rightfully so.  A 13-year-old is a child - that's why these laws exist.  Religious beliefs won't, and shouldn't, protect anyone.
Logged

Mockery

  • Frank L. Baum's past bride and Oz princess
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3621
  • Lovely, lovely lady lumps
Re: SlutWalks
« Reply #74 on: July 14, 2011, 01:44:18 PM »

hold on ...you can legally have sex with a 13 year old in the US? that is utterly stupid........

Seriously, you got this from the law I quoted?  It says that anyone (meaning ANYONE) who has sexual penetration (of any type or description) with anyone UNDER the age of 13 is guilty of Criminal Sexual Conduct First Degree.  Period.  How did you get that you can legally have sex with a 13-year-old from that?  Ages 13-16 is also a first degree offense if penetration is accomplished through one or more of the circumstances listed.  There are other degrees of CSC.  For example, a 17-year-old having consensual sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend is a third degree offense.  Sexual touching (non-penetration) is second degree if the victim is underaged and fourth degree (a misdemeanor) if the victim is 16 or older. 




See? That's what I'm saying. The only way a 13 year old could actually have sex with someone older than them would if the parents gave consent.
actually i think technically if a parent were to let their 13 year old (in america) have sex it would be considered child endangerment and the parents would get into trouble
That's a good point.

I think that if a parent let their kids have sex, then there is something wrong. The only way it would be okay if it was some religion. That's the only way I'd give it a semi-okay.

Not only would the parent get in trouble for child endangerment and/or risk having their child removed from their home, but, depending on the circumstances, the parent could be charged with criminal sexual conduct as well.  And rightfully so.  A 13-year-old is a child - that's why these laws exist.  Religious beliefs won't, and shouldn't, protect anyone.

Well they do. Look at the Sister Wives.
Logged
was too busy looking at the attractive girl in the weird paint vag bib.

I have 47 Indja Points
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8  All   Go Up