"Rape Is Not Always Rape" - Nick Ross Triggers Outrage And Defends Rape Comments

[The Lonious Monk]

I honestly don't see how anyone can defend a case of a chick getting drunk and consenting to sex as being rape. How can the law on one hand say you're responsible enough after drinking to know not to drive but on the hand say you're not responsible enough to know whether you want to have sex or not. That doesn't make any sense.

It's one thing to charge a guy for having sex with a chick that's passed out because she drank too much. It's another thing completely to charge a guy because the chick that agreed to have sex with him had a couple drinks that night.

 

[BlackxChild]

You niggas are quick to laugh and joke, but the stark reality is that there probably are women in your family who you're close to who might very well have been raped.

1 in 5 women will be raped in their lifetime.

Probably even more, since it's still a very under reported crime.

And that includes your mothers being in those statistics as well.

My mom was raped someone broke in her apt and she begged for her life and women still bs about rape regardless so don't use that bullshit on me.

 

[Valentinez A. Kaiser]

Rape can be complicated it aint as simple as yes and no. Woman have the power to destroy a mans life just by the accusation alone. If a girl drinks too much fucks a stranger wakes up and regrets it " oh he raped me". They use it as a tool to get revenge on ex boyfriends, husbands etc. it's pretty hard to disprove a rape because even with consensual sex the physical evidence is still there. Rape in 2013 is tool used against men to show power. I'm sure there are legitimate rapes but Lets not forget that woman can be spiteful.

It's interesting you say that at the bolded, because it's kinda the flip side to the actual act of "rape".

What I mean by that is it is often and widely cited that the act of rape is used on women (or men) to show power, but what you're saying here is that the "accusation of rape" regardless whether it is in fact true or not is used in equally the same manner.

That's a really interesting perspective.

 

[BlackxChild]

So if a woman is drunk and consents to sex and regrets it the next night is it rape?

I had a girl get into bed with me let me give her a massage then she took her shirt off and let me do everything and told me I couldn't put my dick in.... Is that rape when she clearly is just bullshitting and wants me to put it in?

If she says don't put your dick in her, how can that be taken as a "yes let's have sex"?

Bc she said she loved me after I pulled out...

 

[desertrain10]

better question would be, how many of us been hit with false accusations only to have the detective realize the bitch is full of shit?

you throwing stats like they actually prosecute bitches that cry wolf.

your numbers are skewed because yall dont want them bitches that cry wolf to be held accountable, because it would "dissuade the real victims to come forward"

you aint slick.

only half of victims of rape come forward anyways

and they do prosecute individuals who falsely cry rape

its a hard thing to prove though

Just like rape

Consider out of 100 rapes 5 lead to convictions

And only 3% of rapist spend a day in jail

Google it boo

This is true, but you can't pretend there isn't a push to not prosecute or even expose the names of women who make false rape accusations for the fear that it will discourage other rape victims from coming forward with their actual true stories/accusations.

Ok sure. Though i believe anyone who commits perjury should be held accountable for their actions, we must also it make it so victims of rape feel as though the law is on their side to prevent more rapes. As i was saying an already low percentage of rapes are actually reported, and most rapist are repeat offenders.

And one could even argue that first address why only 3% of rapist actually see a jail cell before we start locking up the few who make false allegations...

Its all just talk now. People who falsely cry rape are being legally prosecuted more then ever before

 

[BlackxChild]

Shit is a chick gets naked lets me eat her out and do everything then tells me I can't stick it in and then I do and she grabs my butt and pushes me in all I gotta say is your telling me no...... BUT YOUR BODY YOUR BODIES TELLING ME YEEEESSS I don't see nothing wrong feel a little bump n grind....

 

The user and all related content has been deleted.

 

[BlackxChild]

Let me get this right if a man has sex with a woman and both are drunk and both have sex doesn't that mean both where raped?

 

[LUClEN]

Idea for my next book: The Rape Gene

 

[Colin$mackabi$h]

I don't think the kids are gonna learn anything if they don't see the parents doing that shit first.

 

[loch121]

Nick Ross and Rick Ross are brothers

 

[deadeye]

Let me get this right if a man has sex with a woman and both are drunk and both have sex doesn't that mean both were raped?

Apparently not.

Under the law, a drunk woman cannot legally give consent to have sex.

Basically, if a woman is drunk and consents to do something that she normally wouldn't do if she was sober......then she isn't responsible for her actions.

Yet at the same time, if the man she has sex with is just as drunk as she is...he's not going to be given the same benefit of the doubt.

Meaning, he won't be able to claim that he's not responsible for his actions and wouldn't have had sex with the woman in question if he was sober.

Well, he can claim it...but he won't be taken seriously because his situation wouldn't be acknowledged under the law.

Having said that, knowing what I know...it wouldn't be advisable to engage in sexual relations with a woman who even appears to be only slightly intoxicated because you have no control over how she will respond once she's sober.

If she thinks that the act was consensual, you're in the clear.

However, if she thinks the act wasn't consensual...then...under the law.....you would be viewed as a rapist.

Definitely not worth the risk.

Better off taking a loss for the night and leaving her alone.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Let me get this right if a man has sex with a woman and both are drunk and both have sex doesn't that mean both were raped?

Apparently not.

Under the law, a drunk woman cannot legally give consent to have sex.

Basically, if a woman is drunk and consents to do something that she normally wouldn't do if she was sober......then she isn't responsible for her actions.

Yet at the same time, if the man she has sex with is just as drunk as she is...he's not going to be given the same benefit of the doubt.

Meaning, he won't be able to claim that he's not responsible for his actions and wouldn't have had sex with the woman in question if he was sober.

Well, he can claim it...but he won't be taken seriously because his situation wouldn't be acknowledged under the law.

Having said that, knowing what I know...it wouldn't be advisable to engage in sexual relations with a woman who even appears to be only slightly intoxicated because you have no control how she will respond once she's sober.

If she thinks that the act was consensual, you're in the clear.

However, if she thinks the act wasn't consensual...then...under the law.....you would be viewed as a rapist.

Definitely not worth the risk.

Better off taking a loss for the night and leave her alone.

It's even more dangerous than that though. Not everyone acts super ridiculous after they have a few drinks. You could meet a chick and she seems completely within her faculties, so you think you're good. Then she might turn around and say she was drunk, and her friends could back her and say that she did drink a lot. At that point it becomes your word against theirs.

 

[deadeye]

Let me get this right if a man has sex with a woman and both are drunk and both have sex doesn't that mean both were raped?

Apparently not.

Under the law, a drunk woman cannot legally give consent to have sex.

Basically, if a woman is drunk and consents to do something that she normally wouldn't do if she was sober......then she isn't responsible for her actions.

Yet at the same time, if the man she has sex with is just as drunk as she is...he's not going to be given the same benefit of the doubt.

Meaning, he won't be able to claim that he's not responsible for his actions and wouldn't have had sex with the woman in question if he was sober.

Well, he can claim it...but he won't be taken seriously because his situation wouldn't be acknowledged under the law.

Having said that, knowing what I know...it wouldn't be advisable to engage in sexual relations with a woman who even appears to be only slightly intoxicated because you have no control how she will respond once she's sober.

If she thinks that the act was consensual, you're in the clear.

However, if she thinks the act wasn't consensual...then...under the law.....you would be viewed as a rapist.

Definitely not worth the risk.

Better off taking a loss for the night and leave her alone.

It's even more dangerous than that though. Not everyone acts super ridiculous after they have a few drinks. You could meet a chick and she seems completely within her faculties, so you think you're good. Then she might turn around and say she was drunk, and her friends could back her and say that she did drink a lot. At that point it becomes your word against theirs.

Exactly.

Too much ambiguity.

 

[Mr_Vicodin81G]

It aint rape if you yell "Suprise"

 

[BlackxChild]

Woman explain yourselves for this fuckery.

 

[desertrain10]

I prob wont get a straight answer but instead of solely focusing on false rape claims drunk sex male posters do you sympathize with the women who were actually raped yet couldnt prove it in the court of law which is a very difficult thing to do, or their rapist was released on a legal technicality...or take into account how often these said women are ostrasized by their peers because many people assume them to liars

And wha do you think about those who live in constant terror because their rapists are still walking around

t

I honestly don't see how anyone can defend a case of a chick getting drunk and consenting to sex as being rape. How can the law on one hand say you're responsible enough after drinking to know not to drive but on the hand say you're not responsible enough to know whether you want to have sex or not. That doesn't make any sense.

It's one thing to charge a guy for having sex with a chick that's passed out because she drank too much. It's another thing completely to charge a guy because the chick that agreed to have sex with him had a couple drinks that night.

its not that blk and white ...men arent just charged and/or convicted of rape solely because their accuser had to much to drink

The plantiff has to make the case that in her drunken state she was taken advantage of physically or she was unconscious or there are traces of a date rape drug in her system

law enforcement officials arent even going to pursue the case if there isnt pictures, bruising, etc basically any incriminating evidence to suggest a rape occured

And people slander and lie on people all the time ...doesnt make it right or mean we shouldnt hold these people legally accountable for their actions, which we already do.... it also doesnt mean we should take rape accusations any less seriously, now thats a slippery slope

 

The user and all related content has been deleted.

 

[Star Nine]

I was on Crime Watch once smh.

Edit: Not for rape

for looting?

 

[blackrain]

better question would be, how many of us been hit with false accusations only to have the detective realize the bitch is full of shit?

you throwing stats like they actually prosecute bitches that cry wolf.

your numbers are skewed because yall dont want them bitches that cry wolf to be held accountable, because it would "dissuade the real victims to come forward"

you aint slick.

only half of victims of rape come forward anyways

and they do prosecute individuals who falsely cry rape

its a hard thing to prove though

Just like rape

Consider out of 100 rapes 5 lead to convictions

And only 3% of rapist spend a day in jail

Google it boo

This is true, but you can't pretend there isn't a push to not prosecute or even expose the names of women who make false rape accusations for the fear that it will discourage other rape victims from coming forward with their actual true stories/accusations.

Ok sure. Though i believe anyone who commits perjury should be held accountable for their actions, we must also it make it so victims of rape feel as though the law is on their side to prevent more rapes. As i was saying an already low percentage of rapes are actually reported, and most rapist are repeat offenders.

And one could even argue that first address why only 3% of rapist actually see a jail cell before we start locking up the few who make false allegations...

Its all just talk now. People who falsely cry rape are being legally prosecuted more then ever before

I don't disagree that something needs to be done about how rapes are prosecuted and increase the number of rapists in prison so they can be stomped to death by other prisoners. Rapists are the lowest form of life, always have been. However I don't see a reason to keep these two issues apart. They can both be addressed at the same time. False imprisonment, especially for a crime like rape that once accused even if the charges are dropped and the woman said to be liar carries serious societal and social consequences forever. Nobody looks at a man whose been accused of a sexual assault crime the same again even if the woman flat out admits he lied. There will always be some that doubt it and think he's guilty and his life will suffer because of that.