That doesn’t at all answer what the sarcasm was for. He clearly had no problem finding post 4. Whatever. I’m not getting anywhere with you pretending that you don’t understand my questions.
How does Cecilia Braekhus feel about the incident?
The UK legal code on the other hand does seem to include unwanted kissing under the heading of sexual assault.
I don’t have a really strong opinion on the matter, but do kind of lean towards the UK definition rather than yours. Howabout you? Do you think there is a strong argument to be made that one view is superior to another? Or in other words are you philosophically committed to your version or do you just regard it neutrally as the law of the land? If tomorrow it was proposed that Maryland change their sexual assault/battery laws to include unwanted kisses would you have a strong objection or would you just shrug your shoulders? Just curious( no gotchas here ).
It says:
But kissing on the lips without lips ore tongue entering a mouth? I wonder if they’re including all types of kissing.
So kissing is a form of touching. Regarding touching:
It says touching is not automatically sexual. Obviously, not all kissing is sexual.
I wouldn’t argue otherwise. Just that it can be.
I realize you’re probably getting overwhelmed by the responses directed towards you but I would like your views on what I posted in #91. I’ll repeat it here:
I feel these are reasonable laws. They make a distinction between assault, which is a violent crime, and sexual assault, which is a sexual crime.
I realize I’ve been using sexual assault in past posts and now I’m talking about Forcible Touching. I don’t see that as a significant distinction. You could just as easily rename the crime something like Sexual Assault in the Third Degree and it would be the same crime. (For the record, there is a crime of Sexual Assault in New York but it’s the most severe level of sexual crime. It’s essentially Rape in the First Degree with aggravating factors. Which is obviously not applicable here.)
Got ya. But I still wonder if the “e.g. Kissing” would include kissing that doesn’t go beyond lips on lips when penetration was mentioned.
It’s also interesting that New York’s definition of “forcible touching” includes “…or for purpose of degrading or abusing that person”. I think we can all agree that everything that goes on in a pre-fight staredown is for purpose of degrading the other person, no? The question then would just be whether the lips are a “sexual or intimate part”.
See the pics in post 56
Not when it comes to New York’s unlawful surveillance laws. I would assume the definition wouldn’t change for forcible touching.
I wouldn’t agree. It’s actually intended to throw the other person off their game. In most cases not personal at all. It’s a psych, a tactic they are both engaging in.
Killing their mother would probably also throw them off their game. But you’re not allowed to do it.
Something that would otherwise be a crime doesn’t become legal just because you’re doing it for the sake of winning a boxing match.
But this is not committing an act which is clearly a crime. This is a situation where two people have agreed to a confrontation taken to the edge of the line of allowable acts, the crime of assault is not defined for that purpose. This is more like two people on a date and one leans in and kisses the other without asking for express permission first. In that the results are harmless outside of the agreed upon activities it is a misunderstanding, not a criminal act.
That’s a pretty bad argument. Punching your opponent in the face is a normal part of a boxing match. Kissing your opponent in the face is not. So the fact that somebody agree to fight a boxing match with you doesn’t mean they’re agreeing to be kissed by you.
For the record, punching somebody is not considered an acceptable part of a date.
Well, I for one am shocked - shocked! - to see that no one has bothered to look up what Norwegian law actually has to say on the matter.
From here:
OK, but are unwanted kisses filed under “seksuelle handlinger”? As it turns out, the answer is yes:
That settles that, then, so y’all can stop quoting all kinds of utterly irrelevant foreign laws - be it from the U.S., the U.K., Botswana, Uruguay, Nepal or whatever.
It’s intended to throw the other person off their game by personally debasing them.
Steken, I assume that the reason nobody else quoted Norwegian law is that most of us don’t know Norwegian. Could you provide a translation? I’m guessing that “for eksempel kyssing” means “for example kissing”, but that would be a lot more useful with the context that I’m not getting.
What is it about this kiss in this context that would make it flustering and intimidating?
I’m not clear about what you are saying. Do you think a boxer should be disqualified in a match for kissing his opponent? Kissing is a likely action to be encountered in a date, and harmless contact, not to mention some more harmful contact is a likely action to be encountered in a pre-fight stare down. It’s a dramatic situation, and a staged event, a kiss is slightly crossing the line, far less serious than fouls that are can occur in a boxing match that wouldn’t disqualify a boxer.
The personal part is a matter of perception. The debasing applies to every other aspect of the pre-fight stare down.
I’ve been raped, and yet I don’t feel calling this a sexual assault cheapens my own experience at all, so steady with the speaking for all of us, there.
I think it’s a relative misdemeanour assault, though, and it should be up to the victim whether it should be taken further.