Predisent Donald J. Skroob: Episode IX: Pray for Toledo

[Zealot]

Punk,

If two people willingly engage in coitus, even if the engagement is contingent upon some exchange of goods and services, that's not rape. The key phrase is "willingly." Your example, which NO ONE ELSE was contemplating, posits a tenant propositioning the landlord or, if the other way around, the tenant being happy to go along with it.

What literally everyone else in this thread was talking about, and what has been explained in both legal and ethical terms as wrong and sexual harassment/assault/rape is when a person leverages a position of power or control over someone else to coerce them into a sexual act.

"I can't pay my rent but we can have sex if you let me stay" isn't rape.

"Have sex with me or I'm throwing you out on the street" is.

No one is addressing your demands for a response because after the original premise was dissected ad nauseam, you concocted a wholly new scenario and began insisting it was equivalent to the original, and people are just fucking over it.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Thunder]

No. This is so wrong. Lol. Even agreeing to sexual favors in exchange for letting someone live somewhere is illegal and considered rape since you have power over them and their quality of life can be effected by your decisions. It doesn't matter if the person is currently in a stable financial situation when being approached by someone who has power over them and entering into a sexual relationship.

I.e. Harvey Weinstein and all the other Hollywood execs getting popped.

It's why bosses and their subordinates don't date. HR would fucking die if they found out.

For starters I'm of the position that the exchange of sex for any goods/services ought to never be allowed legally because it's unethical to some degree always ("power over them" being always present and I'm not too keen on the wishy washy distinction between offering money vs a more illiquid resource like contracts/housing)

But in your own framework, can a prostitute whose got multiple homes in the same city, under different landlords, exchange sex for rent and it be ethically OK (because certainly legally it's fucked, but kind of all prostitution is so I don't really think that point is useful in teasing anything out)?

What it comes down to for people like you, I think, is just how easily the person can say no without any additional (dennis.gif) implications. And what I think I can boil that down to is the "need" of the prostitute for whatever resource is being offered up for their sex. Your limit for the additional implications falls somewhere where it's OK to take money but are not making an effective distinction (to me, anyway) between someone who might be just not rich enough to easily say no to a regular sexual favor for money vs someone so rich/wealthy/resourceful that they can say yes to sexual favors for other resources like property (or contracts, like you mentioned)

Oh and of course it isn't like this is a common occurrence, but merely an extreme hypothetical to tease out the edges of of an ethical framework

[D44kpunk]

Punk,

If two people willingly engage in coitus, even if the engagement is contingent upon some exchange of goods and services, that's not rape. The key phrase is "willingly." Your example, which NO ONE ELSE was contemplating, posits a tenant propositioning the landlord or, if the other way around, the tenant being happy to go along with it.

What literally everyone else in this thread was talking about, and what has been explained in both legal and ethical terms as wrong and sexual harassment/assault/rape is when a person leverages a position of power or control over someone else to coerce them into a sexual act.

"I can't pay my rent but we can have sex if you let me stay" isn't rape.

"Have sex with me or I'm throwing you out on the street" is.

No one is addressing your demands for a response because after the original premise was dissected ad nauseam, you concocted a wholly new scenario and began insisting it was equivalent to the original, and people are just fucking over it.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

so what you're saying is, which i totally agree with, i was asking a question that no one was answering and they were just spouting bullshit for 2 pages? the topic first arouse 6 pages ago when zoob said situations like this are rape, i asked where the line was and people said that "I can't pay my rent but we can have sex if you let me stay" IS rape.

glad we are on the same page yet again zealot.

as previously posted, i totally respect not replying to me, replying to me and saying something random is a bit nonsensical especially when it continues to pages on end.

[archibaldcrane]

https://twitter.com/kevincorke/statu...511542272?s=19

Will Trump defy the Supreme Court and try to executive act the citizenship question onto the Census, creating a true constitutional crisis?

Well find out in 4 hours!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

Yes, people were not responding to your proposed scenario which had nothing to do with what was being discussed, glad we cleared that up.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[D44kpunk]

Yes, people were not responding to your proposed scenario which had nothing to do with what was being discussed, glad we cleared that up.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

yo dude, i replied to zoob saying all situations like this were rape, said lets discuss and where is the line drawn? no one had to reply to me, much like the tenant getting free rent from her landlord, it's a choice. my post could have just gone unanswered and we'd be on page 34.

i'm failing to see how replying to me and not replying to anything i'm saying is a justifiable position lol

[Milkster]

Yes, people were not responding to your proposed scenario which had nothing to do with what was being discussed, glad we cleared that up.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

He posts so much that he thinks any posts after his multiple posts is a direct response to him even if no one is engaging him.

[TsingTao]

https://twitter.com/kevincorke/statu...511542272?s=19

Will Trump defy the Supreme Court and try to executive act the citizenship question onto the Census, creating a true constitutional crisis?

Well find out in 4 hours!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I will be shocked if he doesn't do it.

[Milkster]

I will be shocked if he doesn't do it.

He'll spin it to something about bad courts and something something mess about why he didn't.

[zoobernut]

yo dude, i replied to zoob saying all situations like this were rape, said lets discuss and where is the line drawn? no one had to reply to me, much like the tenant getting free rent from her landlord, it's a choice. my post could have just gone unanswered and we'd be on page 34.

i'm failing to see how replying to me and not replying to anything i'm saying is a justifiable position lol

I never said all situations like this were rape. I very specifically laid out the scenario in which person A has power over person B (person A can decide if person B has a place to live or gets a job or keeps their job or etc.) and PERSON A offers a quid pro quo in exchange for sexual favors that is NOT legal and NOT consensual. That is coercion. I even said in one of my posts that if the scenario is reversed it gets muddy and often times isn't the same because the person not in power is seeking out the person in power. However I know in businesses even then it is NOT LEGAL.

[D44kpunk]

to which i responded, we were discussing what makes it rape, not the legality of it. prostitution is illegal in the united states except in reno(?) dunno unlike milkster i've never had to pay for it or get paid for it. getting paid for sex in any shape or form is illegal in most places.

but yeah we've been over this. in the post you quoted i asked where the line is drawn there, so in the spirit of not rehashing the whole discussion i'm just gonna say you have an incredibly odd view of the world if you view a tenant on their own free will sleeping with their landlord for free rent as being rape. most relationships/marriages must also be rape in that vein.

Oh and lets remember that coercing people to have sex with you through money and or power is rape just as much as physically holding them down in the eyes of the law.

[Salodin]

i'm just gonna say you have an incredibly odd view of the world if you view a tenant on their own free will sleeping with their landlord for free rent as being rape. most relationships/marriages must also be rape in that vein.

Ahahahaha

And you people still respond to him seriously. Cmonnnnn

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[DrClout]

https://twitter.com/kevincorke/statu...511542272?s=19

Will Trump defy the Supreme Court and try to executive act the citizenship question onto the Census, creating a true constitutional crisis?

Well find out in 4 hours!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Even if he does, isn't it a question we can just... skip? Or does that fuck up the entire questionnaire.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Salodin]

Even if he does, isn't it a question we can just... skip? Or does that fuck up the entire questionnaire.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

The fact that it's even there is going to keep people from participating, which is the whole point. Less participation hurts dems/helps reps overall, and so this is how we suppress representation in 2019.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Milkster]

to which i responded, we were discussing what makes it rape, not the legality of it. prostitution is illegal in the united states except in reno(?) dunno unlike milkster i've never had to pay for it or get paid for it. getting paid for sex in any shape or form is illegal in most places.

but yeah we've been over this. in the post you quoted i asked where the line is drawn there, so in the spirit of not rehashing the whole discussion i'm just gonna say you have an incredibly odd view of the world if you view a tenant on their own free will sleeping with their landlord for free rent as being rape. most relationships/marriages must also be rape in that vein.

Gred this is the absolute worst trolling. Electric chair.

Also I'm sorry you're so trash at sex no one has ever thought of giving you money or gifts for it. Sounds like something you should work out with a therapist.

[DrClout]

The fact that it's even there is going to keep people from participating, which is the whole point. Less participation hurts dems/helps reps overall, and so this is how we suppress representation in 2019.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Granted. Also, isn't there some law that requires an answer that says you defer from amswering? I see that answer on many political survey's as of recent.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Roranora]

careful now; we don't want any semi-relevant discourse breaking out

[DrClout]

Lol.

But for real. If he pushes it but still obligated to give us a chance to defer out of it, then why not let him have this one without the backlash

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Salodin]

Lol.

But for real. If he pushes it but still obligated to give us a chance to defer out of it, then why not let him have this one without the backlash

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Because it doesnt matter if you can opt out, it reduces turn out and reducing turn out harms proper representation, in the favor of Republicans.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[DrClout]

Copy that

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk