General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: You can be pro-victims rights and still acknowledge the absurdity of the Assange ordeal [View all]riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)From another thread, hack believes the government (and hack plural - hack likes to address themselves as "we"
gets to strip a woman of her right to control her own authority, to make decisions about their bodies. He believes there will be 'clear evidence" of a crime that will supersede a woman's rights so I've asked him exactly what he means by "clear evidence" since obviously this is the crux of the matter with Sweden.
Would such evidence include being tied up, or hit with a whip? (BDSM). Or how about strangulation? (erotic asphyxiation). Rough sex? Gentle nudging against your lover's leg with your penis to provoke arousal? How about waking up your lover to make love? (is that really rape? Guess you get to decide, not the woman involved).
Really, why do you get to decide which activity is "rape" and what's "lovemaking"? Since you have decided there's a standard of 'clear evidence", go for it. Define "clear evidence" that entitles YOU to decide if that sexual activity is "rape" or consensual sex (and not the parties involved)?