- Stop talking on your cell phone when you drive.
- Stop talking on your cell phone when you use a public restroom.
- Stop talking on your cell phone at the movies.
- And for the love of Christ, stop talking on your cell phone while you rape
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Cell Phones
Cell PhonesFollow
You morons really need to:
Do what now?
So the real question is: did he leave roaming charges?
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
So the real question is: did he leave roaming charges?
No, the real question is, why wasnt he using his bluetooth?
Edited, Mar 12th 2007 4:47pm by Aadyn Litefoot
The more important question:
Would she have reported this as a rape if she hadn't heard the guys wife on the phone?
I call BS (I know. Predictable. Sue me).
/agree with the general argument about cell phones though...
Would she have reported this as a rape if she hadn't heard the guys wife on the phone?
I call BS (I know. Predictable. Sue me).
/agree with the general argument about cell phones though...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Aadyn Litefoot wrote:
Samira wrote:
So the real question is: did he leave roaming charges?
No, the real question is, why wasnt he using his bluetooth?
Agreed. We all know it's easier to rape with both hands.
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"
gbaji wrote:
The more important question:
Would she have reported this as a rape if she hadn't heard the guys wife on the phone?
Would she have reported this as a rape if she hadn't heard the guys wife on the phone?
Actually, she reported being raped before, so the likely answer is, yes, she would have reported it this time.
However, it gets stranger. That previous rape? Same guy. And according to the article: "In the latest incident, according to arrest documents, the woman was folding laundry when Seibert, of the 7000 block of Carlisle Pike, showed up around 2 p.m.
Seibert said he wanted to talk and at first they sat on a swing outside, but then Seibert followed her into the house after asking the woman for a drink, according to arrest documents."
Um, if he raped her before I think sitting on a swing with the guy is a bad idea. I've never been raped before - I imagine it would be horrific. I would tell the guy to leave and if he didn't I'd call the cops.
yossarian wrote:
Um, if he raped her before I think sitting on a swing with the guy is a bad idea. I've never been raped before - I imagine it would be horrific. I would tell the guy to leave and if he didn't I'd call the cops.
But an accomplished, cowardly rapist knows how to pick victims who become paralyzed by their fear.
Regretting sleeping with someone does not make it a rape. Fucking jealous she-whores. 
yossarian wrote:
Um, if he raped her before I think sitting on a swing with the guy is a bad idea. I've never been raped before - I imagine it would be horrific. I would tell the guy to leave and if he didn't I'd call the cops.
It is not at all uncommon, and also underreported, to be raped by one's partner. I have no idea as to the details of this particular story, I haven't even read the article. I'm just mentioning it.
And gbaji, regardless of whether or not she would have reported it, I'm sure she secretly enjoyed it and thought about her father the whole time or whatever ****** up ******** you tell yourself.
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
Quote:
I would tell the guy to leave and if he didn't I'd call the cops.
You could even borrow his phone so he couldn't follow you inside!
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
yossarian wrote:
gbaji wrote:
The more important question:
Would she have reported this as a rape if she hadn't heard the guys wife on the phone?
Would she have reported this as a rape if she hadn't heard the guys wife on the phone?
Actually, she reported being raped before, so the likely answer is, yes, she would have reported it this time.
Um, no. Actually, she didn't. Did you read the article?
Quote:
Yesterday, Seibert, 24, was arraigned on charges of rape, sexual assault and indecent assault in the alleged Aug. 30 incident at Leiby's Parkway, a mobile home community in the 7000 block of the Carlisle Pike. He was released on $25,000 bail.
According to arrest documents, police were notified on Sept. 2 after the woman, whose name is being withheld by The Patriot-News, went to Harrisburg Hospital, where she told a nurse she had been raped.
The woman, who knew Seibert, also told police that Seibert had raped her once before on May 5, according to arrest documents. That incident was not reported until Sept. 3.
According to arrest documents, police were notified on Sept. 2 after the woman, whose name is being withheld by The Patriot-News, went to Harrisburg Hospital, where she told a nurse she had been raped.
The woman, who knew Seibert, also told police that Seibert had raped her once before on May 5, according to arrest documents. That incident was not reported until Sept. 3.
Both rapes were reported *after* the incident on Aug 30th. She waited 3 days to report it (Sep 2nd). She then doesn't mention that he'd supposedly raped her a month before that until the next day after that...
So no. This was not a case of being raped, reporting it, then having the same guy come by and rape her again. This is a case of a woman coming in to the hospital claiming to have been raped three days earlier by a guy she knew, after hanging out with him and chatting, then inviting him inside for a drink. Oh, and this is supposed to be after he raped her a month earlier...
Sigh. When did "rape" become synonymous with "sex"?
Quote:
However, it gets stranger. That previous rape? Same guy. And according to the article: "In the latest incident, according to arrest documents, the woman was folding laundry when Seibert, of the 7000 block of Carlisle Pike, showed up around 2 p.m.
Seibert said he wanted to talk and at first they sat on a swing outside, but then Seibert followed her into the house after asking the woman for a drink, according to arrest documents."
Um, if he raped her before I think sitting on a swing with the guy is a bad idea. I've never been raped before - I imagine it would be horrific. I would tell the guy to leave and if he didn't I'd call the cops.
Seibert said he wanted to talk and at first they sat on a swing outside, but then Seibert followed her into the house after asking the woman for a drink, according to arrest documents."
Um, if he raped her before I think sitting on a swing with the guy is a bad idea. I've never been raped before - I imagine it would be horrific. I would tell the guy to leave and if he didn't I'd call the cops.
It's only strange if you assume that she's telling the truth. It makes complete sense if you instead assume that she was not raped, but instead was having sex with the guy consensually, heard his wife on the phone, got pissed off that he lied to her about being married, and concocted the entire thing to get back at him.
Which do *you* find more likely?...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
marks?
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
So no. This was not a case of being raped, reporting it, then having the same guy come by and rape her again. This is a case of a woman coming in to the hospital claiming to have been raped three days earlier by a guy she knew, after hanging out with him and chatting, then inviting him inside for a drink. Oh, and this is supposed to be after he raped her a month earlier...
Ok, and?
Does not reporting rape make it not so? Does sleeping with someone who raped you make it not rape?
What's wrong with you, exactly, that you begrudge women who were raped the right to recourse? Mommy was a prostitute or something?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
Does not reporting rape make it not so? Does sleeping with someone who raped you make it not rape?
No. Neither does calling an act of consensual sex "Rape" make it so.
And our legal system ought to be smart enough to figure this out.
Quote:
What's wrong with you, exactly, that you begrudge women who were raped the right to recourse?
You're looking at this backwards (again). I absolutely want women who are raped the right to recourse. However, I believe that a legal system that encourages women to make false allegations of rape makes it harder for the women who are realy raped to get the justice they need and deserve.
You have read the "Boy who called wolf", right? Most schoolchildren understand the meaning of the story and figure out that we should not do the kind of things the boy did. Apparently, you didn't get it though...
Edited, Mar 12th 2007 7:08pm by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
You have read the "Boy who called wolf", right? Most schoolchildren understand the meaning of the story and figure out that we should not do the kind of things the boy did. Apparently, you didn't get it though...
Thankfully, most of the rest of humanity is able to judge each rape case on its individual merits or lack thereof, and not on some perceived societal trend.
gbaji wrote:
When did "rape" become synonymous with "sex"?
At the risk of soiling my pristine image, I'm going to side with gbaji on this one, and state for the record that this dirty ***** was begging for it.
Now that we have that nasty business behind us, I am wondering about another scenario I heard somewhere. Like, what if two dudes vote to have sex with a chick, but she votes no, and they totally bang her rotten anyway? Is that rape, or is it okay because majority rules? Also, help me link this to other totally unrelated and absurd arguments, please.
Edited, Mar 12th 2007 7:26pm by Barkingturtle
Now that we have that nasty business behind us, I am wondering about another scenario I heard somewhere. Like, what if two dudes vote to have sex with a chick, but she votes no, and they totally bang her rotten anyway? Is that rape, or is it okay because majority rules? Also, help me link this to other totally unrelated and absurd arguments, please.
Edited, Mar 12th 2007 7:26pm by Barkingturtle
trickybeck wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You have read the "Boy who called wolf", right? Most schoolchildren understand the meaning of the story and figure out that we should not do the kind of things the boy did. Apparently, you didn't get it though...
Thankfully, most of the rest of humanity is able to judge each rape case on its individual merits or lack thereof, and not on some perceived societal trend.
But apparently, not our media, nor our legal system. Nor apparently can many members of this forum, who appeared to be more interested in the fact that he took a phone call while raping her then bothering to read the story and realize that her claim of rape is pretty darn questionable. We already had one person misread it and assume that she had reported the first "rape", then was raped again by the same man. Kinda changes the whole thing when you make that sort of mistake.
Don't you see that as a problem? I might not be so concerned, except it seems like this sort of thing happens constantly. Are people just unable to read a set of facts and figure out for themselves what it means? When did that happen?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Barkingturtle wrote:
Now that we have that nasty business behind us, I am wondering about another scenario I heard somewhere. Like, what if two dudes vote to have sex with a chick, but she votes no, and they totally bang her rotten anyway? Is that rape, or is it okay because majority rules?
You're looking at this backwards (again). I absolutely want women who are raped the right to recourse. However, I believe that a legal system that encourages women to make false allegations of rape makes it harder for the women who are realy raped to get the justice they need and deserve.
The presumption that the US legal system 'encourages' women to report actual cases of rape, never mind, false allegations is ludicrous beyond measure. All due respect, I think you need to spend more time actually listening to what women say rather than just staring at their tits.
You have read the "Boy who called wolf", right? Most schoolchildren understand the meaning of the story and figure out that we should not do the kind of things the boy did. Apparently, you didn't get it though..
I did read it. I also developed a more complex understanding of societal dynamics and the legal system than a children's fairy tale imparted to me. Not everyone does. Fantastic window into your thought process and rigorous intellectual standards though.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
gbaji wrote:
trickybeck wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You have read the "Boy who called wolf", right? Most schoolchildren understand the meaning of the story and figure out that we should not do the kind of things the boy did. Apparently, you didn't get it though...
Thankfully, most of the rest of humanity is able to judge each rape case on its individual merits or lack thereof, and not on some perceived societal trend.
But apparently, not our media, nor our legal system.
Cite?
Just because you have some sort of hang-up doesn't mean the legal system isn't doing its job.
I might not be so concerned, except it seems like this sort of thing happens constantly.
Well, let's hope the media doesn't start reporting every story of a Unix admin chocking on peanuts or you may never eat one again. Judging the actual prevelance of something based on the reporting of that thing is mind numbingly stupid. Making that judgment in the US when that something involves sex in any form is 100 times stupider.
I guess there was a massive problem with satanic cults taking over day care centers, too, since that was the exciting media story of the week in the 80's. Thank goodness that's over. Thank goodness all the thousands of communist organizations waiting to ferment rebellion in the US all vanished in 1960, that was a lucky break, too.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
The presumption that the US legal system 'encourages' women to report actual cases of rape, never mind, false allegations is ludicrous beyond measure.
There is no other crime in US law that I'm aware of where the accuser can make her accusation while remaining effectively anonymous. Couple that with the high degree of sensation (and therefore media play) in a rape case, and the massive negative reaction towards anyone accused of rape, and you've got a triple whammy that is going to make some women think "Gee. I can accuse him of rape. I don't need to have anyone know that I'm the accuser. He gets raked through the coals, but when the case falls apart, no one will ever reveal my identity nor even bother with a story...".
It's the perfect way to get back at someone. And that's exactly what has been happening.
Quote:
I did read it. I also developed a more complex understanding of societal dynamics and the legal system than a children's fairy tale imparted to me. Not everyone does. Fantastic window into your thought process and rigorous intellectual standards though.
But apparently not enough to realize that if we encourage and allow women to abuse the "special rights" afforded them in the case of a rape, the result is that women who are actually raped will find it harder to have their cases taken seriously. Sure. Right now, everyone's going overboard everytime some big rape case hits the news. But as time goes by and more and more of those cases end up being lies, what do you think that does to women who are really raped?
Funny that you can say "complex understanding of societal dynamics", but don't seem to have a clue what it actually means.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
trickybeck wrote:
gbaji wrote:
But apparently, not our media, nor our legal system.
Cite?
Just because you have some sort of hang-up doesn't mean the legal system isn't doing its job.
Hmmm... Duke LaCross team ring any bells with you?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
trickybeck wrote:
gbaji wrote:
But apparently, not our media, nor our legal system.
Cite?
Just because you have some sort of hang-up doesn't mean the legal system isn't doing its job.
Hmmm... Duke LaCross team ring any bells with you?
And what conclusion did you draw from that case?
trickybeck wrote:
And what conclusion did you draw from that case?
1. That women do lie about being raped.
2. That a combination of our legal system and media make it terrifically easy to do this, ruin people's lives and reputations, and "get away with it".
What conclusions did you draw from it?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Recent Visitors: 346
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (346)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Cell Phones
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC