Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

How to answer/address a comment made by my Daughter-in-law


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, bOObOO said:

Suppose someone said No at first but then showed no resistance whatsoever, no longer saying No and by body language indicating she was not resistant at all.  People often change their mind. Consider this case portrayed in a court of law.

Oh yes, every woman's fantasy is for a man to not respect their wishes and attempt get physical with them against their will.  "No, huh?  we'll see about that!"  That would change any woman's mind! How could they resist such bravado? 

Since this is a hypothetical, lets say that for whatever CRAZY and unreasonable reason that the physical aggression after she said "no" didn't turn her on or change her mind.  In that scenario, did/could the man take her virtue from her if she didn't physically fight?

Whether she changed her mind or not, this is a dangerous man and should be taken off the streets.  To become physical after a woman gives no indication of consent (not physically resisting is not a sign of consent - it could be a sign of horror/fear/trauma) and who said "no" is a man that is a danger to society and needs to be taken off the streets.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

I honestly think this guy is a danger to women. 

He is presenting ideas that are dangerous for women, easily used for justification of rape by others even if he is not tempted. 

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'd also challenge the claim that people "often change their minds" from not wanting to have sex to wanting to have it, after someone tries to force them into it.

I would challenge your phrase "tries to force" and recommend the phrase "tries to persuade" as a more probable representation of what happened.  Easy enough to provide multiple testimonies from people who have witnessed that personally when no gun or knife was involved.  It's a common routine between many husbands and wives, and many boyfriends and girlfriends.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, bOObOO said:

I would challenge your phrase "tries to force" and recommend the phrase "tries to persuade" as a more probable representation of what happened.  Easy enough to provide multiple testimonies from people who have witnessed that personally when no gun or knife was involved.  It's a common routine between many husbands and wives, and many boyfriends and girlfriends.

You live in a world where it’s “common” for men to force their wives/girlfriends to have sex?  That’s a very sick world you live in. 

Link to comment
Just now, Raingirl said:

You live in a world where it’s “common” for men to force their wives/girlfriends to have sex?  That’s a very sick world you live in. 

You are using the word force, not me.  I was using the word persuade.  And yes many boyfriends try to persuade their girlfriends to have sexual relations with them, and vice versa.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Canadiandude said:

Weird question but if Ahab has been like this for a while now…why not just perma-ban his new account?

That’s a very good question, as he has displayed this behavior and mindset under every sock puppet he uses. I wonder if there is a way to prevent him from continuing to make new sock puppets.  As soon as one is banned, he starts using a new one. 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Calm said:

He is presenting ideas that are dangerous for women, easily used for justification of rape by others even if he is not tempted. 

No, you are twisting what I am saying to suit your preferred translation.  I am talking about how people need to be clear when they respond to other people's advances to try to get what is wanted.  Just be clear.  Either resist or comply with advances.  Don't allow someone to think you are going along with what they want you to do if you really do not want them to do that.  Don't pretend.  Don't be a fake or a tease.  If you don't want sexual relations with someone be clear that is not what you want and say No! as clearly as as directly as you can say it.  And if you die, you die, at least you stood up to your attacker and died with integrity.

Edited by bOObOO
Link to comment
1 minute ago, MiserereNobis said:

My God, Ahab, your thinking about sexual assault and consent has been SO messed up the little bit I've read (only the last couple of pages of this thread).

What would law say about this situation:

I start my car to warm it up, step outside, and close the door. A guy asks me if he can have my car. I say no. He gets in the car and drives away anyway. I don't try to stop him. Did he steal my car, or did I change my mind since I didn't do anything after I said no? If I report this to the police, are they going to say, "well, you should have jumped in front of the car to stop him. Since you didn't do anything and were not resistant at all, there was no auto theft."

I think you clearly see that my car was stolen because I initially said no. But the fact that you can't see that sexual assault occurs when a woman says no is truly sick.

Stick with the subject at hand, please.  Trying to assault someone's body, sexually or otherwise, does not compare with taking something outside of that person's body.  Just be clear.  Either resist or comply and be consistent in that situation.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

Your absolutely right. Ahab doesn't understand consent. He does what he wants no matter what people tell him.

This has gone too far. He needs to be banned. Every sock puppet needs to be immediately reported and banned. I know he'll just make another one, but that shouldn't stop the bannings from happening. I know it's extra work for the mods, and that sucks, but it's because Ahab is an ***.

Getting rid of me or just trying to get rid of me is exactly what Satan wants you to do, bro.  But go ahead, try it.  The more persecuted I am the more I feel what our Savior went through.

Poster removed

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Islander said:

The larger issue, from where I stand, is why does she want to attend the temple? It seems a "socially normative" event from a LDS perspective rather than a heart-felt one. They do not attend church, do not like the culture (I can absolutely relate to that one) and struggle with issues that are central to LDS living (WOW, dressing, etc). Given the issues above, I believe that the temple will not do much in general for them. The divorce rate in the church is fast approaching the norm "out there" so the temple is not going to do much if they struggle with other issues in their walk with God.

Agreed - I am not sure they are wanting to go - this was in response to my question asking if they ever saw themselves going to be sealed there.  She could have just answered, "we don't want to", but instead, her answer centered around her not feeling bad fro living with my son before marriage.  You are likely correct in the lack of real desire on their part.

Link to comment
50 minutes ago, Canadiandude said:

Weird question but if Ahab has been like this for a while now…why not just perma-ban his new account?

His new account is number 7 or 8 (or maybe more) of sock puppets that he's created to get back on.  At this point the best thing would probably be for everyone to put him on ignore.

Link to comment
32 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

You are one messed up person.

I sincerely wonder if he's not delusional, or dealing with some other mental health issue.  I just can't fathom that a rational mentally healthy person would be behaving the way that he is or posting what he posts.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, bOObOO said:

Getting rid of me or just trying to get rid of me is exactly what Satan wants you to do, bro.  But go ahead, try it.  The more persecuted I am the more I feel what our Savior went through.

Actually, Satan would want you to stay and continue spewing your sick beliefs. 
 

To compare yourself/beliefs  to the Savior is  twisted. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Navidad said:

I know you don't always appreciate what I say, but I will take your comment one step further (farther?). I think he is a danger to women, this forum and to the COJCOLDS. Suppose someone you all deem an anti-Mormon comes on this forum and reads this thread? He or she picks out his comments and makes them normative for someone in TCOJCOLDS? He clearly proclaims himself a faithful and righteous member. What if that anti-person spreads Boo-boos' comments around the net on his or her favorite anti-Mormon forums? Then someone like me gets to defend you all against his atypical venom. For the life of me I don't understand why comments like his are not blocked by the powers that be? But then again, it isn't my forum is it? I just worry about and feel protective of both the women and the COJCOLDS when he spews his venom. It isn't normative. It is harmful. Ok, now I feel better. . . .got that rant off my chest! Take care.

Yeah, I’m out for a bit. 
 

Exmo Reddit wouldn’t tolerate this kinda stuff. It has its own problems granted but stuff like this gets moderated pretty quickly.

I gave y’all (and myself) space over conference but I think I’m gonna take some more again.

Perturbed.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Canadiandude said:

Yeah, I’m out for a bit. 
 

Exmo Reddit wouldn’t tolerate this kinda stuff. It has its own problems granted but stuff like this gets moderated pretty quickly.

I gave y’all (and myself) space over conference but I think I’m gonna take some more again.

Perturbed.

They wouldn’t tolerate Ahab?  We haven’t either but he appears to be like black mold. Very hard to get rid of.

How does Reddit keep people from making sock puppets after they are banned?  Especially since so many people have made it so you can’t ban their IP addresses anymore either.

Maybe we can take a play from their book. 

Edited by bluebell
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...