I read that 1 in 7 people will die of cancer. But that's obviously wrong because if 14% of Americans were dying every day from cancer, I would have heard about that.

Also, would anybody ever go to the doctor if there was a 14% chance of coming back with a cancer diagnosis?

When you enthusiastically opine that bitches be lyin, claim rape statistics are made up by feminazis, and have poohpood rape and death threats women have received online its not really hard to figure it out.

So whatever, just hopefully no young women ever look up to you

I don't think a person could come up with a worse analogy. But I'll humor you.

The risk of developing any type of cancer is somewhere around 35%. The risk of actually dying from cancer seems to be approx 16-18%. The funny thing is, you're actually supporting my argument. There is a reason that cancer is called a disease "that touches everyone", because it has such a high prevalence. I would think almost everyone knows people who have been diagnosed or died of some form of cancer. If the death rate of cancer is 15%, and it's that prevalent, wouldn't you think that the rape state we are questioning (20-25%) is OBVIOUSLY incorrect?

Also, your 2nd statement is arguably worse. Cancer diagnosis is something that you *want* to get early. Indeed, the older you get and the higher your chances of developing a certain type of cancer due to family history, etc, the more likely you are to get your screenings. The reason for that is obvious - to raise your chances of survival through treating it.

I don't see what you're getting at with saying something like this. These two examples are so different it's confusing as to what point you are trying to make. If you came up with another violent crime statistic, I could understand. But this is just lol.

I asked Kerowo the question, but he avoided answering. So I'll ask you : why did the girl rescind her claim? What would be the reason a person would retract a previous statement?

What's really funny here is not only am I right, but I'm pretty sure you know I'm right. You just like to make these stupid arguments to portray me as something I'm not. Yes, Anita Sarkeesian is a phony, and she used her harassment as a reason to propel her career. Just as the girl who made false claims towards the Duke lacrosse team straight up lied in order to look for a way to extract money out of the school/players.

Why would people do this? It's obvious they have a financial interest involved. People like you would much rather gloss over things like facts and take up a cause because it makes you feel like you're some sort of better person to help defend the innocent (or whatever nonsense goes through your head) than actually worry about what is important - the truth. If a woman is actually raped, then by all means, I support that person being punished to the full extent of the law. Rape is essentially the worst thing you can do to a person short of murder. No one supports rape. However, when a person makes that claim there has to be evidence to support that it actually happened.

We can only be grateful that in the eyes of the law, reasonable people will look at evidence and facts in order to find someone guilty than stupidity and false arguments coming from people like you.

Just a few months after Japan admits 27 Muslim "refugees" two have already been arrested for gang rape.

https://m.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/co...wed_27_muslim/

Who knows why the woman changed her story, it's a story told from the point of view of the rapist, so I assume he's telling it in a way that makes him look less rapey. The reason you are a horrible role model for women is because you always take the male's point of view when given a choice. You assume the man isn't lying and the woman is. Hopefully you won't pass that on to anyone but when people say you aren't a quality role model that's why.

This is really aggressively stupid, even for you. I don't think you could have missed the point more.

You said "Would you let your daughter go on a date with a young man enrolled in college if there was a 25% of her getting raped?" That was you literally applying the 1 in 4 statistic to a single instance of a woman going on a date. The fact that you didn't realize how completely ridiculous this was when you typed it means you really don't have the capacity to be having this conversation.

This is laughable. You waving off the reason why the woman changed her story is ridiculous. It's blatantly obvious why she changed her story - because it wasn't true to begin with. It seems you take it very lightly to accuse someone of a violent crime that in many cases winds up with long prison sentences. Maybe trying to figure out if something as serious as rape is true or not isn't important to you, but it is to others, especially the person you are accusing it of.

As for always taking the side of the male, I have no idea where you'd get this idea from. How many discussions have we ever had where I've taken the male's side of the story where the female's side of the story wasn't highly questionable? You act as if I'm biased. I'm not you. I look at the facts and then come to a conclusion. The facts in your accusation of Foldn being a rapist don't add up.

I hope you're never mistakenly accused of something so serious, because maybe then you'd look at things in a different light. There are real consequences for these vacuous claims you make trying to be humorous. There's nothing funny about rape.

Oh, I'm sorry, I misunderstood your point. Yes, you are correct, the 1/4 stat was describing the total time enrolled at a college. I was using it in a single instance.

Yes, you are right. It was a bad example and should be disregarded.

Are there people in the thread who actually believe 1 in 4 women are going to be raped on college campuses?

And one more thing. I take notice that you are implying he's lying instead of taking a bit of time to wonder about why she rescinded - which happens to be be most important sentence of the entire story. So, ironically, you're actually saying "dudes be lying, yo".

You're a bad role model for young males, kerowo. What kind of world do we live in when young men will look up to you, young men everywhere, and you can so nonchalantly dismiss a male from being able to tell the truth? How many males do we have in this very thread who may be influenced by your disgusting dismissal? Men can't tell the truth, now? All men are liars? A brotha just can't be honest, can they?

私はあなたがkerowo愛し.

I agree.

If you count the full 4 years and any conveyance at any point in a sexual encounter that can be considered non consensual, then yes. You can count me as one who believes that statistic.

Most people (especially men) don't realize that rape isn't defined as brutal force by a stranger ripping the clothes off an unsuspecting woman.

Maybe its a good idea then to make mandatory (as part of the Admissions process) PSAs to 1000 incoming freshman girls at a time, informing them that 250 will be raped in their 4 year college experience.

Just this PSA, then dismiss for the day:

The University I graduated from started a mandatory sexual assault identification and prevention training for all incoming undergrads a few years ago.

Has some human behaviour changed that this should be necessary now, or is it purely because of greater understanding of the prevalence and seriousness of sexual assaults?

They were giving the same kind of freshmen orientation 30 years ago when I went; can't give consent when drunk means drunk sex is rape.

You're probably too young to realise how horrific attitudes to rape were until fairly recently. There's still a lot of education about affirmative consent needed but it's not that long ago that people didn't even get No means No.

Maybe this will shock you:

That was the position of the UK parliament in 1984. Marital rape wasn't even recognized until 1991. But look at the language of the bit in bold - worth repeating:

"The majority of us ... believe that rape cannot be considered in the abstract as merely 'sexual intercourse without consent'. The circumstances of rape may be peculiarly grave.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marita...land_and_Wales

Really? Really?

Can we have a show of hands how many people in this thread have ever had sex drunk?

Can we have a show of hands how many people considered it rape? Did it depend on many factors or is kerowos definition correct, that all drunk sex is rape?


This is exactly the idiocy I talk about. Listen to yourself dude. Wtf?

to all you college people
TRUMP 2017
now go find you a safe spot

It will be funny to see how badly they do in the real world.

I just want to expand one more time on this before I go to sleep.

Hypothetical: me and my wife had sex tonight after having three bottles of wine. We were both legally intoxicated. Neither of us actually verbally consented about having sex, it just happened. Which one of us were raped, me or my wife? Were we both raped? Were neither of us raped? If so, who should report it first, me or her, or should we do a 3 way call with the 911 dispatcher and report it at the same time so neither of us looks like we waited too long to report it?

Keep in mind that marital rape is a thing, and men can be raped just as women can be. I'll await your answer.

Edit : How many times have YOU ever had sex intoxicated? Would you consider that rape?

To expand on that point, say your wife wakes you up by giving you a blow job.

Sent from my SM-G925W8 using 2+2 Forums

I would consider treating it as if consent can be given retroactively once she sobers up. Retroactive consent can't be withdrawn once given, but failure to go to the police or some other authority doesn't imply retroactive consent.