Deep thoughts

BeardofPants said:
'Cause he was the shiznit. Ring only turned pitiful weaklings invismable. The invisibility issue was only a small byproduct of the rings of power.

<edit> By pitiful weaklings, I mean those who only inhabited the physical world (eg Men), as opposed to elves, and ainur/maiar, who inhabited the spirit world as well. The theory goes that since elves etc already existed in that realm, they wouldn't go invisible in the physical realm, whereas mortals who didn't inhabit that realm naturally, would become invisible when wearing the ring, as they were 'entering' the spirit realm.
Click to expand...
Yeah...that's pretty much what Rob said but I didn't really think it explained it. I'll just push my I believe button. Thanks BoP.
 
Man bites dog? No - woman marries dolphin




JERUSALEM (AP) - Sharon Tendler met Cindy 15 years ago. She said it was love at first sight. This week she finally took the plunge and proposed. The lucky "guy" plunged right back.

In a modest ceremony at Dolphin Reef in the southern Israeli port of Eilat, Tendler, a 41-year-old British citizen, apparently became the world's first person to "marry" a dolphin. Dressed in a white dress, a veil and pink flowers in her hair, Tendler got down on one knee on the dock and gave Cindy a kiss. And a piece of herring.

"It's not a perverted thing. I do love this dolphin. He's the love of my life," she said Saturday, upon her return to London.

Tendler, who said she imports clothes and promotes rock bands in England, has visited Israel several times a year since first meeting the dolphin.

When asked in the past if she had a boyfriend, she would always reply, "No. I'm going to end up with Cindy." On Wednesday, she made it official, sort of. While she acknowledged the "wedding" had no legal bearing she did say it reflected her deep feelings toward the bottlenosed, 35-year-old object of her affection.

"It's not a bad thing. It just something that we did because I love him, but not in the way that you love a man. It's just a pure love that I have for this animal," she said.

While she still kept open the option of "marrying human" at some stage, she said for now she was strictly a "one-dolphin woman."

She's hardly the jealous type, though.

"He will still play with all the other girls there," she said, of their prenuptial agreement. "I hope he has a lot of baby dolphins with the other dolphins. The more dolphins the better."
Click to expand...

source

As I predicted, people have now married both animals and corpses. I'm not quite sure what more proof is needed.
 
Professur said:
There is a charge, usually termed violating a corpse. But that covers everything from dragging it behind your car, to painting a smilie face on it. I'm just talking rape. Can rape be applied to a corpse?
Click to expand...

You can't rape anything that isn't a female and that doesn't have a vagina. And that isn't human. You can sexually violate anything you like (maybe not a tree) but rape refers solely to the unconsented vaginal penetration of a human female by a human male. We just use the word for other things 'cos we're lazy.

Professur said:
But I'm the legal guardian of this corpse. Don't I get to say how it should be disposed of?
Click to expand...

When you can demonstrate how putting your penis in a corpse could be considered disposing of it, then sure. Unless you mean you want to simply carry on banging it until it decomposes, disintegrates and completely falls to bits.
 
tonksy said:
I'd say yes...I mean it's still the same intent. Say you steal a cookie from the cookie jar and no one reports it, in your mind you knew that you stole it because you didn't have permission but you just didn't get called on it. Same thing...only one is really, really sick and twisted.
Click to expand...

Do you really think that stealing cookies is sick and twisted? It's only delicious baked treats you're stealing, not money.
 
Altron said:
Do you really think that stealing cookies is sick and twisted? It's only delicious baked treats you're stealing, not money.
Click to expand...
no...I think raping a corpse is sick and twisted.
 
a13antichrist said:
You can't rape anything that isn't a female and that doesn't have a vagina. And that isn't human. You can sexually violate anything you like (maybe not a tree) but rape refers solely to the unconsented vaginal penetration of a human female by a human male. We just use the word for other things 'cos we're lazy.
Click to expand...

I suppose that depends where you are in the world - in SA unconsented homosexual sex is also classified as rape.
 
Oh for godssake. Look up a definition of rape. Now tell me where it says that rape is vaginal only. Rape refers to "sex acts", and last time I checked, sex is not only restricted to vaginal intercourse, or hetero for that matter.
 
a13antichrist said:
You can't rape anything that isn't a female and that doesn't have a vagina.
Click to expand...
Really? I suppose if you were wrongfully imprisoned and fucked (one assumes against your will ;) ) up the ass, them had all your teeth broken out so there wouldn't be a biting problem while someone was using the other end (this happens with alarming frequency in American prisons, I've read), you would not consider yourself raped? Just curious, because I know I would.
 
a13antichrist said:
No, I wouldn't. I would consider myself sexually violated. Rape is a very specific subset of sexual violation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, dictionary.com disagrees with you. It said "especially sexual intercourse" but doesn't LIMIT rape to vaginal sex.

rape1 ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rp)
n.
The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.
The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction.
Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice.

tr.v. raped, rap·ing, rapes
To force (another person) to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse; commit rape on.
To seize and carry off by force.
To plunder or pillage.
 
Perhaps you're too lazy to use your brain and realise that by that definition, a dog could "rape" a sheep with a peanut. The problem you have is that you've got this concept of rape that you feel the need to apply in order to somehow validate the hurt that the victim might be feeling. Well guess what, the word doesn't mean shit, it's a word, get over it.

More to the point, the only reason the issue exists is because originally, rape did only apply to penile penetration of a vagina, and at the point the PC crowd decided that this was unfair as "sexual violation" was a lesser penalty (for god knows what reason) than rape. And of course every person's trauma must be recognised and we must all cry a few tears for each one. So our dumbarse politicians decided that instead of adjusting legislature to reflect the fact that males as well as females can be sexually violated, we would just adjust our interpretation of the linguistic conglomerate that is the word "rape". Like I said, lazy-asses.
 
Yeah, and you're full of bollocks, but we already knew that.

Wikipedia.com said:
Rape is a crime where the victim is forced into sexual activity, in particular sexual penetration, against his or her will. The word originates from the Latin rapere: to seize or take by force. The Latin term for the act of rape itself is raptus.

...

History

The concept of rape, both as an abduction and in the sexual sense, makes its first appearance in early religious texts. In Greek mythology, for example, the rape of women, as exemplified by the rape of Europa, and male rape, found in the myth of Laius and Chrysippus, were mentioned. Different values were ascribed to the two actions. The rape of Europa by Zeus is represented as an abduction followed by consensual lovemaking, similar perhaps to the rape of Ganymede by Zeus, and went unpunished. The rape of Chrysippus by Laius, however, is represented in darker terms, and was known in antiquity as "the crime of Laius", a term which came to be applied to all male rape. It was seen as an example of hubris in the original sense of the word, i.e. violent outrage, and its punishment was so severe that it destroyed not only Laius himself, but also his son, Oedipus.
In antiquity and until the late Middle Ages, rape was seen in most cultures less as a crime against a particular girl or woman than against the male figure she "belonged" to. Thus, the penalty for rape was often a fine, payable to the father or the husband whose "goods" were "damaged." That position was later replaced in many cultures by the view that the woman, as well as her lord, should share the fine equally.
Rape, in the course of warfare, also dates back to antiquity, ancient enough to have been mentioned in the Bible, which mentions the abduction of women as war trophies.
The Greek, Persian and Roman troops would routinely rape women and boys in the conquered towns. The same behaviour was observed as late as the 1990s, when the Serbian troops, targeting Bosnia and Kosovo, conducted a calculated campaign of raping women and boys in the areas they controlled.
Rape, as an adjunct to warfare, was prohibited by the military codices of Richard II and Henry V (1385 and 1419 respectively). These laws formed the basis for convicting and executing rapists during the Hundred Years War (1337-1453).

...

English law
Under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which came into force in April 2004, rape in England and Wales was redefined from non-consensual vaginal or anal intercourse, and is now defined as non-consensual penile penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth of another person. The changes also made rape punishable with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

...

United States Uniform Crime Reports
In the United States, the Uniform Crime Reports use the term, "forcible rape", only to describe rapes perpetrated by men against women. The respective States, however, often independently expand the definition. Male-on-male rapes are usually recognized as such, as are female-perpetrated rapes.

...

Male rape
Although rape and sexual assault is usually a crime against women, men can also be raped. According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics, for 2003 [2], 9.9% of rape and sexual assault victims in the United States, age 12 and older, are male; therefore, nearly 17 out of every 100,000 males are victims. According to the data for 2004 [3], this number has fallen to 2.95%; therefore, slightly more than 5 out of every 100,000 males are victims. Many of these male victims are likely children and there may be many more male victims under age 12 (not included in BJS figures).
While statistics are non-existent regarding the gender of rapist compared to that of victim, male rape victims are commonly victimized by other men. Although women can commit an act of rape by non-consensually forcing a man to engage in a penetrative sexual act, males are more common victims of anal rape. Men are traumatized by rape and sexual assault just as female victims.
Click to expand...

etc, etc. It may be just a word, but clearly you haven't figured out its actual meaning. :rolleyes:
 
a13antichrist said:
I know it does. Like I said, we're too lazy to make the distinction anymore.
Click to expand...
It never was a distinction, except to you. Virtually everyone else on the forum understood what the word means, why are you being so deliberately obtuse? I guess then that you don't know that statutory rape applies equally whether the child is male or female?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top