Rape/Sexual Harassment does not exist!
Debate Rounds (4)
Having failed at attempting this debate earlier on ,due to an innocent misinterpretation of a specific rule by my opponent, I"ve decided to rerun it to be a little more clearer. This debate is intended to convince my opponent that rape/sexual harassment does not exist,while he is ordained with the duty to convince me otherwise.There shall be no acceptance round .
Rape : A situation where two people has consensual sex but later the girl alleges that she was sexually harassed .
Is it rape if she moaned with pleasure? Is it rape if she climaxed? Debate....
Rape: The crime, typically committed by a man, of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with the offender against their will.
Due to the fact that this definition has been provided by Oxford dictionary, it is difficult for my opponent to provide a counter definition from an equally reliable source that is in favour of their argument.
As we know there are multiple rape cases in the world, here are some examples
14 year old girl stabbed and raped
17 year old gang raped
27 men rape girl
I think that both me and my opponent can admit that rape does happen. You may not consider it as rape but the bottom line is that the most reliable dictionaries define rape as something that does exist. Rape happens a lot and is a pressing issue. I cannot say much more on the topic until my opponent provides an argument. My opponent asks if it is rape if she moaned with pleasure. The answer is yes. It was unwilling and therefore it is rape. I almost certain that the definition mentions that it is against their will. They may not always moan with pleasure. My opponet makes this assumption with their round 1 argument. Babies are also raped and I find it disguisting and wrong. I doubt that they moan with pleasure. I ask that my opponent revises their argument and reads this carefully for posting their argument in the next round.
The rest of my sources are the newspaper articles with their links posted above. I aplogize for the short argument however there is a 4000 character limit so I cannot go into too much detail with my arguments.
The production of moisture in the victim's vagina would be a result of psychological desire for sex, which also encourage the " perpetrator " to penetrate her even further . The " victim " might have said " no "with her mouth, however her vagina has said " yes" ,remember,actions speak louder than words .What you do show your intentions and feelings more clearly than what you say.
2. It should not be rape ; No means Yes.
It's no secret that a woman could say no with her mouth, but means yes with her heart , because women never say " YES", when a woman says " No" she means " maybe " and when she says " Maybe " she means " yes ".
I had a situation where I attempted to naai a lady, and she resisted, proclaiming she does not need any soldier to enter her barracks. I, being the gentleman that respect women rights, I let her be. The lady, however informed her friends she desired to be naai`d by me,I merely did not pressurize her enough .
This shows women act like they do not want sex but inside they die to have the " perpetrator's " piel inside of them .
Let's take a moment to read the following ,something I believe will provide an astonishing insights into the point I made above, and please note,The content may contain material that may be inappropriate for some users .
A guy trying his luck invites a girl to his house, after refreshments, movies and music tries to get things going. He ran his hands down the sides of her body, his left hand stopping to caress her thigh. Her responds goes like
Please do not touch me .
Then the guys starts to romance the thighs, the lady responds:-
Please do not touch-
The guy continues by pulling up the skirt and massaging the fresh,
soft and warm thighs, and the girl responds:-
Please do not -
Then the guy goes further to kiss her inner thighs, getting closer and closer to her " cake " , she moans:-
Please do -
He thereafter had sexual intercourse with her, and she screamed with pleasure :-
This lady had sexual intercourse with somebody, moaned and climaxed, and because she feels dirty and cheap, she's more likely to bolt for the rape whistle!
Now onto the links provided, did the victims climax ? If the answer is yes, it should not be considered rape, because the vagina consented.
Before I begin, no definition contradictions were made so technically all of my opponents arguments are invalid but I will refute them anyway...
1) The desire for sex doesn't mean that she wanted to have sex with that specific person. As I have said previously not everyone climaxes when being raped. Even if 99% of women do and 1% don't that still means that rape is real and exists and therefore I have won. Actions may speak louder than words but I don't regard that as a controllable action.
2) This argument is completely based on my opponents bias and personal experience. The comment made regarding a women always meaning yes is a completely false and sexist argument. Making specfics towards females is sexist and is jumping to huge conclusions. Just because it has worked out for you and others in the past that does not mean that every woman wants to have sex. If a woman genuinly does not want to have sex and she says no, you cannot assume that she does just because she is a woman.
My opponent has failed to respond to my argument, making mind appear to be a lot shorter than theirs. However, my opponent's argument is extremely short they have just ended a paragraph for nearly every sentence and provided more than one space in some cases. This makes my opponent's argument appear to be lengthy and a lot more detailed. I hope that voters will actually read through the debate rather than vote out of length.
My opponent has failed to provide any rebuttals. My opponent has failed to provide any facts. My opponent's argument is sexist, bias and completely based on personal experience.
Now onto the" rape case"provided above,which my opponent completely ignored ; The conduct of the " victim "herself indicates her willingness,there is no evidence that the " perpetrator " induced her by a ruse or deceit to join him in the room. Did she scream,as he was touching her thigh, did she scratch the accused? As I have already stated that a woman is expected to scream and fight if she does not genuinely consent,and if she does neither, it is argued that she consented .
I'm now going to provide more reasons on why I state rape does not exist,relying on my version of rape provided in the 1st round. Due to the fact that rape cases are unbailable offense, women use it to unduly punish men. They make these cases after personal misunderstanding that is not even related to sex. This is because they are aware men would be detained and therefore use it to blackmail. Others scream rape to disguise infidelity,women in long term relationships who have consensual sex with another man, and then blow the rape whistle to cover their lack of loyalty . Others use it to cover promiscuity, others use it as a psychological ploy to garner sympathy. Teens caught red handed in shameful and disgraceful sexual act by parents,will put up an act by means of false cries, out of sense of shame, thoughts of bringing shame and humiliation to parents due to pregnancy,prompt teens to scream rape ..
The aforementioned elements prove, more or less, rape is a lie,and this lie does more harm than good, a number of men have committed suicide due to these FALSE rape allegations made by vengeful girls and women who are assisted by an unfair justice system in the name of feminism .Victims of false rape claims become disheartened, discouraged,humiliated by lies told by women .The possibility of years in prison and the stigma associated with the claims, results in suicide contemplation and actions.
In conclusion, my opponent complains I use personal experience as ammunition( which proves the points raised regarding women behavior is indeed facts, not a fictional story that I made up in my backyard),when he is in fact struggling to contain his emotions and feelings, he is so concerned with winning to such an extent that he's utterly forgotten the duty ordained to him to prove rape actually exits ,and used the latter round to canvass for votes. He further complains i've used more spaces as a desperate attempt to make my arguments appear longer,however, anyone with highly cognitive analytic prowess will realize length does not matter, what you say is what matters the most, regardless of how short/ long it may be,I'd advice my opponent to learn to make each word count and keep complaints in a minimum. Let the audience judge whose argument is stronger!
My opponent has dropped my argument stating that even if one woman doesn't climax then that means it is rape. As I have stated previously, even if 1 in 99 rape cases doesn't climax that means that there has been one case of rape. Therefore rape still exists. My opponent has also dropped my argument regarding babies being raped. Whilst it is true that some woman may say no when she actually means yes and I do not doubt that my opponents story is true. However, I think that everyone agrees with me that my opponent cannot speak for all women - especially babies. It may sometimes mean yes but as I have said before it does not always mean yes. I hope my opponent understands that they cannot speak on behalf of all women. Unless my opponent provides some evidence or a source then I cannot expand on this. My opponent has repeated this many times and the argument is no more believable than when I began reading their argument.
The rape cases provided by me involved the victims being stabbed and tortured in some cases. Do you think that the person enjoyed that? If the person does scream and doesn't climax and is trying to retaliate it must be rape in that case. Even if that is extremely rare it is still rape and therefore rape does exist. I would also like to remind voters that my opponent has not provided a counter definition to mine. By my definition of rape I still win this debate. Rape does exist and is is proven by my news articles, my definition (from Oxford Dictionary) and by all my other arguments.
Whilst all the examples provided by my opponent (blackmail, to cover their lack of loyalty etc.) that does not mean that this is always the case. If a 6 year old girl is kidnapped and raped to you really think that is to cover their lack of loyalty. Do you think that they do this because they want to raped? Many rape victims suffer life long trauma and can be mentally scarred for life. They can also receive sexually transmitted diseases. Do you think that they had fun doing this. If they liked it and meant to say yes then they wouldn't still be suffering from trauma and mental illnesses decades after they were raped.
My opponents penultimate paragraph makes very little sense. They state that their argument proves that rape is a lie - which I have proved to be a false accusation. They state that the lie does more harm than good. This doesn't make sense because I have proved that rape is not a lie. My opponent claims that people have committed suicide because of false rape allegations however no sources have been provided for this so voters should not take this argument into account. Even if sources were provided that doesn't change the fact that not all rape victims are lyers. There is no evidence for this. My opponent then goes on to list all the side effects of false rape allegations, this still doesn't change the fact that this doesn't always happen!
My opponent has made grammatical mistakes in their conclusion: "i've used more spaces"
My opponents conclusion makes many false accusations. They state that I have forgotten to prove that rape actually exists. I have proven that rape exists with definitions that have been ignored. Cases about babies and young girls / teenagers who have been raped. As well as this I have proven that rape can exist even if the chances are 1 in 1 billion. If it happens the it exists. Since I have responded to all my opponents points and my opponent has responded to very few of my main points I think that the winner of this debate is clear. In the final round I will make any necessary final rebuttals and an expanded conclusion. I will also provide the reasons to why I have won this debate in more detail.
http://www.newindianexpress.com......) There are unusual features about this article which raises grave doubts in my mind,and which makes the story almost unbelievable. The article asks us to believe the victim walked out of her home at 4 am,in all innocence. Was there a struggle that took place as the accused were taking her to a secluded place? Is it credible that the victim merely stood there and allowed the accused to take her to a quiet place, without shouting for help? Is it credible she sat and watched the accused strip off their clothes and hers without shouting,if she had not consented? If she did shout,Is there any evidence that when she shouted the accused attempted to place his hand on her mouth? Where is the evidence that the victim did not consent to a twosome beforehand?The article goes on and claim the two neighbors were arrested. This still proves nothing. Remember the accused is brought to court in one of the following manners,namely: 1. By way of ARREST 2. By written notice to appear,in which the case the accused is asked to pay an admission of guilt fine or appear in court; 3.By summons in a magistrates' Court matter or by an indictment and notice of a trial in a High Court matter. And also,Did the accused plead guilty to sleeping with the accused without her consent? Did the court find the accused guilty as charged and imposed an appropriate sentence in the form of imprisonment? The article makes no mention of such,and therefore it is unbelievable, poor and void. The story may be another fabricated rape story,like the rest. Journalists are known for fabricating bizarre stories, to boost their sales. Fake Rape Story Editor Leaving Rolling Stone | Truth Revolt , www.truthrevolt.org/news/fake-rape-."If a 6 yr old girl is kidnapped and raped to[do] you really think that is to cover their lack of loyalty."The aforementioned statement is very illogical,fragile and easy to demolish ; Con culpably creates a false assumption that a 6 year old baby can be engaged in a long term relationship. Also,I had no Idea a 6 year old baby is considered a woman . I have clearly and unambiguously stated that: WOMEN in LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIPS who have consensual sex with another man, fake rape to cover their lack of loyalty. I believe my assertion contains sufficient information to place con in a position to assess sufficiently and to form an idea of what I had in mind.." I have proven that rape exists with definitions .. Cases about babies and young girls who have been raped." CON has not proved anything thus far,young girls below the age of 12 do not have the capacity to consent to sex and they do not get raped ,due to the reason that consent is given on behalf of a person by the parent,guardian of that person, for the benefit of the person on whose behalf it is given. Kids as young as 7 year old are sold to men by parents who can consent on behalf of these babies, customary law and practice in present day in African countries does not deal with such matters, There are many situations of men who have abducted young girls,only to have the girls ' families negotiate marriage of the girls to such men, these young girls automatically qualifies as majors, remember a minor is a person under the age of 18 years who is UNMARRIED, and so far as these young girls still remain married under the law they have no right to refuse the husband the marriage cake, having paid the expensive bride price. As custom demands the husband has the right of the sex organ of his young wife on payment and satisfying all marriage procedure . "I would also like to remind voters that my opponent has not provided a counter definition to mine" Refer to round #1 for my definition. CON's argument is not impeccable itself "Not all rape victims are lyers"" Whilst it is true that some woman may say no when she actually means yes " CON has conceded .I still firmly believe rape does not exist,and the blame goes to CON for weak arguments.
That is 1 article - even if your claims are true, it is 1 article. How many rape cases are there monthly ... yearly? I'm not sure if my opponent understands that when a person is going to rape someone they aren't going to just stand there are let them call for help - that would be stupid. The person was most likely gagged with a cloth to stop them from being able to talk. I would also like to bring up another argument since there is no debate structure there are no rules stating that I am not allowed to do this.
I am curious to what my opponent thinks of this case: https://www.google.co.uk...
In this case a man pleads guilty and admits to raping a girl. Surely this is enough evidence to prove that rape is a real thing that exists. If the rapist agrees that it's rape and the person who has been raped agrees it then it has to be rape. If a 6 year old girl is kidnapped and raped I never said that the girl had to be in a long term relationship because that's unlikely. What the point of that argument was that if a 6 year old was kidnapped and raped it would be slightly strange if they consented - especially if they were younger.
My opponent claims that I have conceded when I say that some women may say no when they actually say yes. Whislt it is true that I believe this the word some is the key word here. The words all and some are different. You cannot say with enough certainty that all women mean yes when they say no. This is a false accusation that has been solely backed up with personal experiene
Here are some of the reasons as to why I have won this debate and why my opponents case is invalid:
- My opponent has failed to refute my definition
- My opponent has attempted to avoid arguments regarding babies being raped and girls under the age of 12.
- My opponent has provided very few reliable sources.
- My opponent has used personal experiences as his source.
- My opponent has demonstrated his lack of conduct in the comments by refering to me as a moron.
- I have successfully refuted all of my opponents arguments and my opponent has failed to convince me that rape does not exist.
To sum up, my opponent main arguments have been refuted by con. The question stating: is it rape if she climaxed? My opponent cannot say with great certainty that everyone who is raped climaxes. Rape can not only be one kind. There are other types of sex such as oral - would she climax them?
My opponent has also stated that all women mean yes when they say no to sex. This is clearly false and backed up entirely on personal experience. My opponent has failed to show how he knows that all women mean no when they mean yes. Although this is rare - men do also get raped although it is usually children and teenagers being raped. Based on these facts ...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jonbonbon 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Con actually provided sources to back up his arguments. He showed that there are definitely times that a man forces himself onto a woman sexually when it's not invited, and even if she climaxed, it was still an act of rape. Pro honestly made some disgusting and unfounded arguments that just didn't need to be said. Also pro asserts that women never say "no." Coming from a woman, there are lots of situations where a woman means no. Like when she says "no" for example.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.