Please Help! Boundary Issue

I don't think men are playing around

and I don't think education will help men who rape, nor do I think they should be helped as much as combatted. I don't believe there is "subtle" rape, if a man can get consent from a fully knowledgeable, alert and awake woman -- which at any time that consent can be retracted by simply stating stop, or anything with similar meaning such as no -- no matter how manipulative or how much of a weasel salesman, or slick grammarian the man is, it wouldn't be rape. Mental coercion is physical force.

It might be effective to teach women that men who ask for sex and have to be told twice, are assholes who probably will rape you if you pass out, so they might not want to drink around such men, but if a woman can be talked into having sex, that is not rape. Men try that shit all the time, and if every woman had some mental point that could be reached wherein they would finally agree, many men would be rapists because the sad thing is many men don't give fuck whether the women desires to have sex, because most men are straight up assholes.

How do you teach a person to respect another whom they do not?

Not caring whether or not a woman desires to have sex with them is not respect. People who do not respect others inherently, cannot be taught respect, they can only be taught submission.

more accurately, males who do not respect others who are respectable, cannot be taught to respect, they can only be taught submission.

Women's minds are more open, and with that openness comes a greater ability to see and know the truth

Explicit consent that is retractable at any point before or during sex is a good line to distinguish rape from not rape. Smooth talking a women into consenting to sex just means the male is an asshole, which is typical, but not rape. It near impossible to teach a person how not to be an asshole if he is an asshole.

Assholes are people who don't care, and for the very few individuals who are assholes, but honestly do care about others are very apparent. People who want to learn are easy to educate, those who do not are impossible to educate.

I know he's a popular author, and it's not OK to oppose his theories, and this entire post is a perfect example of what happens when someone does.

Relationships are all about offering and acceptance, and all this bullshit about monogamy being wrong and poly being right, has poisoned many people's mind.

What's right to offer and have another accept, won't be right between two other people's agreement

The distinction between my views and others damn near black and white, just because if appears there is so little difference in ground between us, or even if it difference is extremely subtle, doesn't mean the difference isn't night and day.

Telling a person who is only one half of the agreement that she needs to agree with anything is wrong. Her relationship may be wrong for you and it may even be wrong for her husband, but the only real way to honestly help them is to help them figure out what THEY want, because it doesn't matter one tiny fucking iota what anybody else wants. That is how a relationship works, and when the relationship is between more than two people, THEY refers to them all.

there really isn't a right or wrong except for what is right for the three of them and anyone else involved.

It's true that when you believe in, or hold false beliefs in your core beliefs or your constitution, you will accept people and their behavior in your life even though you do not want it, you accept it because you feel you don't have a choice. So anytime someone is made to feel that they have to do something, I will speak up and say "fuck that, you don't need to do anything" because they don't. If there's anything they need to be doing in order to be right and or just happy, they need to not listen to ignorant people, that includes ignorant mono and poly people
 
Last edited:
Righteous Much?

We cling to our prejudices HARD.

You are right about that; you do seem to cling to your prejudices very tightly.

I can't tell if you are being intentionally obtuse to get a rise out of me or if it really does bring you some sense of comfort to believe that any human on the planet who does not immediately agree with you clearly hates cripples. I suspect it is the second, just a defense mechanism to protect yourself from needing to do any introspection or refine your worldview beyond the radical. It's a shame really, because all it seems to do is protect you from seeing reality.

I'll clear it up for you: I have stopped engaging you because you deal in guilt and shame as conversational tactics. I have stopped engaging you because you keep arguing from a self-imposed place of authority. I have stopped engaging you because you continue to make WILD assumptions based on your own imagined interpretation of what people are saying.
 
Schrodinger-that was my point actually. That just because we personally cant concieve of not knowing-doesnt mean that others know.
We cant assume that people will "naturally" stop. They may not know.
 
and I don't think education will help men who rape, nor do I think they should be helped as much as combatted.

We've been combating rapists since the dawn of humanity. If that were effective at preventing rape, we wouldn't need to have this discussion. The problem is with people's attitudes, and those can only be changed by education.

As fucked up as it is, there are people (men and women) who blame victims for getting raped if they drink too much and pass out. Even your own comment "they might not want to drink around such men" implies a certain responsibility for "not getting yourself raped."

There are people (men and women) who think that if you walk around in sketchy neighborhoods, whether or not you're dressed "provocatively," that you're "asking for it."

There are people (men and women) who believe it's impossible for a husband to rape his wife, because it's her duty to have sex with him whenever he wants.

The sad reality is that too often, non-rapists condone rape under certain circumstances.

You can lock up all the people you want, or "combat" them however you see fit, but so long as there are sufficient people with these kinds of attitudes, there will always be new generations who think rape is only rape if you've got a knife to her throat.
 
sorry but that is twisted

Informing a woman that she shouldn't drink around rapists, is NOT victim blaming, it is preventing a woman from becoming a victim, it is empowering them with knowledge.

"NO, it is not the woman's fault if she gets raped while passed out" and anybody who claims it is, is likely to be a rapist, and I call complete and utter bullshit on anyone who "claims" they think it is the woman's fault, they know better

they are lying assholes, and they don't give a shit, of course they will lie

the same with I don't honestly believe any stupid fucker who claims a woman can "ask for it" by dressing provocatively, they know damn well that is just a bullshit excuse

which no offense, it's pretty much your claim that society thinks women enjoy playing hard to get.

none of that has anything to do with violating a person, all the women in the world might love playing hard to get, it still wouldn't excuse rape, however there would be many idiot men who knew god damn well what they did was wrong, yet claim otherwise.

and there would probably be some idiot male author who intentionally or unintentionally justified it by publishing such utter bullshit
 
Last edited:
Politic versus life.

S Cat,

Retarded time? That's just silly and awful! I'm sorry you have to hear that. As far as a group calling themselves a name: YES that is touchy. Some feel it iws taking back the power. Others believe it setting back a movement. I see both sides. Words are slippery.

My friend hates that word "queer" he says, I'm gay. I realized in all this, I never would refer to myself as "straight." I'm a disabled person who hangs out with trans people and gay men and is in a poly marriage - so "straight" just doesn't fit.

If anyone is interested, I started writing my story - about disability and poly in "blogs." LR, is totally right in the fact that if you want to be "heard" it might be just better to TELL your story and listen to others rather than fight with people.

Marcus, If you had actually read any of my posts or work online, you might find that I am INCREdibly introspective. As I described, I just had a real life experience with this (more than one!). I am politically against aborting fetuses with Down's (or you might call "cripples" :) In real life, tho, when a friend had such a pregnancy (as a single mother) I had to put my political views aside and think how do I support her? Can she do this? Could I do this? Would I adopt the baby? I won't go too off topic, but that was just one lesson in realizing "real life" is different from didactic political views.
 
Informing a woman that she shouldn't drink around rapists, is NOT victim blaming, it is preventing a woman from becoming a victim, it is empowering them with knowledge.

Language like "shouldn't" implies responsibility. It does not empower, it restricts. "You shouldn't drink around creepy guys" is intrinsically different from "some creepy guys rape women who drink around them." Telling women what they should and should not do to prevent getting raped is more likely to cause rape victims to wonder if they could have done more to prevent their rape. Adding guilt and responsibility to the trauma of rape is not empowering.

Getting drunk does not cause men to rape women. However, society's failure to educate men that drunk women are not able to give consent because they are not of sound mind can cause men to believe that "taking advantage of an opportunity" is not the same thing as rape. A lot of men have been taught that "not saying no means yes." I would prefer that they were taught "not saying yes means no." That's what I mean when I say educating men can help prevent rape. I haven't read this author so I'm not commenting on what he means by education.

Respect is about behaviour. Behaviour can be changed. Of course people can be taught to respect people. We're not statues, with our thoughts and beliefs set in stone. That's what education is all about.

Retarded time? That's just silly and awful! I'm sorry you have to hear that. As far as a group calling themselves a name: YES that is touchy. Some feel it iws taking back the power. Others believe it setting back a movement. I see both sides. Words are slippery.

Thank you for your empathy. Fortunately, it doesn't bother me. The term is reasonable: electromagnetic signals only travel at the speed of light, so anything you measure is always delayed, ie retarded, from the time it actually occurred. To account for this delay, we use "retarded time" in our formulas. The cringe is just from the association in my head, but I acknowledged that my thinking is responsible for this reaction, not the word itself. As was mentioned before, the word just means delayed.

Actually, the scientific term predates the colloquial, derogatory usage of "retarded" by several decades. When E&M was being developed, words like idiot, imbecile, and feeble minded were en vogue. Mentally retarded was later introduced as the p.c. term. I'm not sure when people started using it out of context ("that's retarded!" or "you retard!" (p.s. good news, "retard" isn't in my Swype dictionary...)).

My friend hates that word "queer" he says, I'm gay. I realized in all this, I never would refer to myself as "straight." I'm a disabled person who hangs out with trans people and gay men and is in a poly marriage - so "straight" just doesn't fit.

Auto describes herself as queer and owns it completely. I can empathize with hating to hear a word and with not wanting to apply that label to himself. I just hope he recognises the right that other people have to choose their own labels, even if they evoke strong reactions for himself.
 
Last edited:
The cringe is just from the association in my head, but I acknowledged that my thinking is responsible for this reaction, not the word itself. As was mentioned before, the word just means delayed.

Actually, the scientific term predates the colloquial, derogatory usage of "retarded" by several decades. When E&M was being developed, words like idiot, imbecile, and feeble minded were en vogue. Mentally retarded was later introduced as the p.c. term. I'm not sure when people started using it out of context ("that's retarded!" or "you retard!" (p.s. good news, "retard" isn't in my Swype dictionary...)).

Also remember colloquialisms are particular to different regions. We don't tend to use 'retarded' in that way so using that term in a general way would not evoke the same emotional reaction as it does to Americans.

When I was a child the term they used over here was Spastic if anyone did something stupid, said something stupid or if one kid just wanted to offend the other, they were a Spastic, in much the way 'retard' was used in the US.

It has gone out of fashion now though.
 
I'm all for personal responsibility. I could make stupid decisions that led myself to become vulnerable to be a victim of crime. That doesn't make the criminals less responsible, it just means that I'm unwise and they are criminals.

Next, unless you've raised a child with profound special needs like many children with Downs have, it's pretty ignorant for you to go around telling people they are wrong for having an abortion. I'm all for educating people about Downs so they know that with support, many people with Downs go on to live at least semi independently, but guilting people who do not have the resources to raise a child with additional needs into continuing their pregnancy is cruel.
 
Last edited:
Spastic refers to a type or symptom of neurological dysfunction in conditions like cerebral palsy. Some medical professionals will still use it.
 
S Cat:

What you wrote about "retarded time" is FACINATING. What branch of science is that? So, the term predates the medical terminology "retarded?" I did not know that!

Yes, retarded and spastic are medical terms (outdated) which then turned into insults - spastic is still a kIND of cerebral palsy (which is what I have/tho don't know if it's "spastic.") Then, those words (obviously) became insults because no one wanted to be "like" those people. i.e. have involuntary movement or be "dumb." I don't have an issue with the words themselves as much as the kind of thought they perpetuate in society.

I think Europe is different. But Americans still have the concept that disability makes a person less of a human. Philosophers like Peter Singer have even argued that people with severe disabilities would be better off dead or not born at all. They argue for some kind of litmus test of standard of life, when it actually has never been proved the people with disabilities are "unhappier."

As I was growing uo, I went to mainstream schools. People told me that they never "thought" of me as disabled. In my 30s I had a life change where I realized that CP was part of me. I was fine the way I am. Then, I began making colleagues and friends with disabilities. Now, I work with people with MS, CP, mental disabilities, an amputee, a poet who is death and blind, and many others. I even had to get over some of my own prejudices of disability - which helped by watching my very sexy friend die in the hospital. I am on a quest to know that every one is a valid human and has something to contribute and sometimes I have to look past "the body" and see a person for who they really are.

Obviously, LOL, girlfriends who host sex parties are a little more difficult for me. But I think I will try to use the same technique in that situation :)
 
My sister has relapsing, remitting MS. Yeah, lots of it sucks but she doesn't go around bleating about life as a disabled person. She also has rheumatoid arthritis and Sjorens disease. She's too busy to go campaigning about disability rights. She's living a normal life with her partner and kid.
 
London: What would bleating entail for you?

Its important for me to be heard, if I can! That I am not complaining about being disabled. I am GLAD I have CP. I believe it has brought me a lot of insight to the human condition and beauty and norms and deepened my empathy and thinking in a way that MAY not have been possible had I been abled.

My "chip on my shoulder" hasn't come from just complaining about the way people treat me but having to actually fight for a lot of rights - particularly in the teaching job market, and I guess it's my calling to fight for the rights of other disabled people too. Or just tell my story. If you look around people are very resistant to hearing a story about disability.
 
My sister has just gone back into teaching. Bleating would entail complaining that you have no life whilst not actually attempting to live one. And I've found your blog very interesting. People like hearing the plight of disabled people, just for the wrong reasons.
 
What you wrote about "retarded time" is FACINATING. What branch of science is that? So, the term predates the medical terminology "retarded?" I did not know that!

Electromagnetism is a branch of Physics that describes, among other things, how radiation and electricity work. It's the science that underlies everything from radios to smartphones -- pretty much the foundation of all modern technology.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/782769 said:
The term 'mental retardation' was introduced by the American Association on Mental Retardation in 1961 and soon afterwards was adopted by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM-5).

A complete description of the fundamental electromagnetic laws was published exactly 100 years earlier by James Maxwell. The notion of retarded time follows directly from those laws ("Maxwell's equations"). It's unclear when exactly retarded time was discovered as a requirement, but it was established by the time Einstein came on the scene in the early 1900's.
 
not even close or not subtle enough

Regarding "retarded time" [sic] and it's fictional physics application

The cringe is just from the association in my head, but I acknowledged that my thinking is responsible for this reaction, not the word itself. As was mentioned before, the word just means delayed.

Actually, the scientific term predates the colloquial, derogatory usage of "retarded" by several decades. When E&M was being developed, words like idiot, imbecile, and feeble minded were en vogue. Mentally retarded was later introduced as the p.c. term. I'm not sure when people started using it out of context ("that's retarded!" or "you retard!" (p.s. good news, "retard" isn't in my Swype dictionary...)).

The term "retarded" and "advanced" comes concepts cycles, and the many cycles within each cycle. The terms are used to explain concepts of "timing", as in any single event that depends on many specifically ordered sequence of events. Furthermore, that each sequence or events needs to occur with precision to be correct, and any deviation from the precision does affect the single larger event.

when the deviation is such that the event occurs "after" the precise timing, the term is "retarded" as in the event happened late, or behind schedule.

when the deviation is such that the event occurs "before" the precise timing, the term is "advanced" as in the event happened early, or ahead schedule.

In the true meaning and concepts of the word, both advanced and retarded equally describe "not precise" of out of whack timing. One is not good and the other is bad, they are just different directions to be out of time.


Electromagnetism is a branch of Physics that describes, among other things, how radiation and electricity work. It's the science that underlies everything from radios to smartphones -- pretty much the foundation of all modern technology.



A complete description of the fundamental electromagnetic laws was published exactly 100 years earlier by James Maxwell. The notion of retarded time follows directly from those laws ("Maxwell's equations"). It's unclear when exactly retarded time was discovered as a requirement, but it was established by the time Einstein came on the scene in the early 1900's.


The terms have absolutely nothing to do with electromagnetism and have nothing to do with the the complete and utter bullshit concept of "retarded time"

SC said:
Language like "shouldn't" implies responsibility. It does not empower, it restricts. "You shouldn't drink around creepy guys" is intrinsically different from "some creepy guys rape women who drink around them." Telling women what they should and should not do to prevent getting raped is more likely to cause rape victims to wonder if they could have done more to prevent their rape. Adding guilt and responsibility to the trauma of rape is not empowering.

Getting drunk does not cause men to rape women. However, society's failure to educate men that drunk women are not able to give consent because they are not of sound mind can cause men to believe that "taking advantage of an opportunity" is not the same thing as rape. A lot of men have been taught that "not saying no means yes." I would prefer that they were taught "not saying yes means no." That's what I mean when I say educating men can help prevent rape. I haven't read this author so I'm not commenting on what he means by education.

Respect is about behaviour. Behaviour can be changed. Of course people can be taught to respect people. We're not statues, with our thoughts and beliefs set in stone. That's what education is all about.

nobody is saying it's right for women to live in fear of men and I think it's despicable that women should ever feel they have to do anything other than be themselves and not worry about the fact that men are uncaring, unfeeling assholes who have trouble with concepts like respect.

and it's fine for you believe that education is going to change that fact, yeah for you and I as a male I appreciate you optimism and hope for the disgusting gender, but taking precaution in order to reduce the number of women that men get away with raping is NOT victim blaming. So long as we share our planet with males, we will never be able to completely stop all instances of violations of personal space known as rape, but I will be damned before I let someone tell me that I am victim blaming for encouraging women to be safe in world that is rampant with asshole males as well as some females who adopt their fucked up way of thinking.

Just today I had my password to facebook hacked, yet again, for clicking a link on an article at mommyish dot com. I blame myself as I believe you should be able to clink links to referenced works on the internet, I did nothing wrong, it was the journoterrorists admins on the site that wrote the code. But I will take precaution because no matter who much educating a person can do, no matter how logical it may seem to some that it is violating electronic boundaries that are very clearly defined -- AND EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT MY BAD FOR CLICKING A LINK IN AN EFFORT TO SEE THE LOGIC IN SOME OF THE FUCKED UP LOGIC PUBLISHED THERE -- I would be much smarter if I refrained for clicking links in the articles of unethical authors and their poorly cloaked misogynistic, articles

do you want to know the authors pseudonyms?
 
The terms have absolutely nothing to do with electromagnetism and have nothing to do with the the complete and utter bullshit concept of "retarded time"

Did you even go so far as to Google it?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=retarded+time

Like any honest scientist, I'm always happy to be corrected when I am indeed mistaken. But I postulate that only one of us is currently, or has ever been, registered in a graduate course on electromagnetism.

Just in case you need a reputable source... Wolfram's ScienceWorld article on Retarded Time

Please, if you're going to call something "utter bullshit" it helps to have a hot clue in hell what you're talking about.
 
Back
Top