Sure you do. Use a condom and swallow it. That would suit your level of paranoia.
Not once she’s agreed to starring in said images, no. But that still doesn’t address the question of why not tell her about your plans to film her.
And so, once again… nothing changes if you tell her in advance that you plan to film. So why not?
I don’t. I want them to be given the opportunity to consent (or not) to being filmed. Why are you avoiding my question?
I am certainly not against women being held accountable for making false accusations, but the film is equally useful whether the woman in question knew she was being filmed or not. Why are you against informed consent?
Because forewarned is forearmed. There is no reason for me to provide a weapon to a person who intends me harm.
Now, once more with feeling. Why are women allowed to commit crimes, free from the risk of revelation? Your entire line of argument is that the tools for self preservation should be stripped from men so that women can achieve their goals.
No, my argument is that the playing field is level when EVERYONE is informed and protected. Like I’ve said repeatedly, go ahead and film, with her consent. This does not ‘forearm’ her, the film shows what the film shows. Add audio, just to be safe. But TELL her about it.
You know, you could save yourself a lot of worry and maintain some semblance of decency with a little boilerplate contract you have them sign in advance.
No you’ve simply alerted her to the fact that she needs to set her rape claim somewhere other than a bedroom.
And you still haven’t answered my question: Why is it right for women to make unfounded accusation while it is wrong for men to mount a defense against the same? This is all the film can do. If everyone is happy, the file waits for eternity on a hard drive. If she decides that she can achieve some goal by sending me to jail, then the film can have it’s day in the sun. You are trying to make it easy for a false accusation to send me to jail. Why?
Please point out an instance of me saying that it’s okay for women to make unfounded accusations, or not okay for men to protect themselves from same, other than by unethically filming their sex without their partners’ consent.
I am not trying to make it easy for people to behave unethically toward you, I am simply not giving you permission to behave unethically toward them.
Why do you feel that the only way to protect yourself is to treat other people unethically?
I’m going to point out that the distribution of sex tapes is immoral. However, the collection of the tape is not; the tape remains as private as my memories, or as the memories as Mrs. Fantine whose rest we disturbed. The tape only serves to make my word equal to the word of a woman.
Now try and keep up. When you say I cannot collect this tape, you also say that I may not defend myself from a false claim of rape. Remember, if you can, that rape is often based on the word of one person. And since we already know that the word of a woman is exalted by this society, I have no defense, unless I record my personal activities. By establishing a society wherein I may not film my encounters you are establishing a society where men may never protect themselves from that claim.
In short, you are trying to create a society where it is impossible to show an accusation to be unfounded. While I am trying to create one where my word can be equal to the word of a woman.
All this does is tell her that she should claim that a rape occurred in the stairwell rather than the bedroom.
Now, try to answer my question. Why are you opposed to making a woman’s word equal to mine? In a game of he-said, she-said, she always wins. However, the film breaks the tie making my word equal to hers.
Of course it does; men as a group are irrational about women, foolhardy. Women depend on men being irrational about them; if men were rational, under our present system they’d treat women (and children for that matter) like they were radioactive and never get within ten feet of them.
How typical of these sorts of arguments that all the trust is supposed to be one way. And a man daring to defend himself is “sleazy”.
And how many women would agree to have sex under those conditions? Women, as you are demonstrating, hate to admit that men have any reason to fear false accusations and take even the implication that such things are possible as an insult. They demand that men either be self destructively trusting towards them, or that men lie to them, or that men be celibate. You are (knowingly I’m sure) proposing a “solution” that simply won’t work because the women wouldn’t go along with it, ever.
You are demanding that men be irrational and ignore our grossly slanted “justice” system, the real way that women act towards such requests, or both.
No. Would say no, always. It’s not like she cares about his problems after all; or even wants to admit they exist. As threads like this help demonstrate.
Why should you be trusted not to distribute the tapes, when by making them without consent you’ve demonstrated that you are not trustworthy?
“We” know no such thing. You are a little irrational on the subject.
Look up ‘reasonable doubt’. You’re in for such a nice surprise!
I’ll keep saying this until you give some indication of hearing it. You may film, WITH CONSENT.
I’m not creating any sort of society, dear. A society in which filming people in ostensibly intimate situations without their consent is considered sleazy already exists. You are trying to convince me that your paranoid delusions should result in a change to that society.
Because that has nothing to do with trustworthiness.
No, like it or not the courts systematically lean towards a women’s word over that of a man. The courts (and society in general) strongly lean towards considering the woman an innocent victim and the man a scumball or monster.
“Reasonable doubt” has little to do with the results of an accusation of rape or child molestation.
I’m saying that women have no right to demand that men behave self destructively, whether or not sex is involved. I’m not going to falsely confess to her crimes to defend a woman, either.
1 Why should I tell when women have not proven themselves invariably trustworthy?
Attacks ad hominem? I’ll ignore this.
Remember the Duke Lacrosse case? Reality doesn’t mean anything. The players were still condemned in the press.
By demonizing the collection of film you are creating a situation where women may successfully falsely accuse someone of rape. As such you are responsible for the imprisonment of innocent people.
Try to recognize reality. Men are assumed (in the event of rape) to be guilty. Without the superior evidence provided by a video camera, a man will always go to jail when an accusation of rape is entered. By recommending the collection of sex-tapes, I am creating an equal society out of a matriarchy.
It is natural to feel upset when your female privilege is being eroded, but it is necessary to create a new and just society.
“I had to do this thing that she didn’t consent to (and in my estimation would never have consented to) in order to protect myself from accusations that I did things she didn’t consent to.”
What I’m hearing is: “I can no longer defend my position with words that have more than four letters. Mods, can we please go some place where decibels substitute for argument”?
Damned straight – false accusations of child molestation or adult rape, no matter how lacking in evidence, can stick with someone for a very long time, even after they’re acquitted of all charges. Just ask JFK Jr. (well…not anymore) or Kobe Bryant, or especially Woody Allen.
Naturally, I’m very sensitive to victims of genuine rape, of which there are legion – but the few (yes, FEW) despicable broads who attempt to fabricate charges should be equally demonized & sent to prison. Seriously – false accusation of rape is just as bad, if not worse, than the actual crime itself IMNSHO. :mad: