A word of advice: when I tell you I’m so certain about what the smallest Canadian province is that if I’m wrong you can ass-rape me, don’t make some lame joke about “I think you might like that.” You get a 0 for Originality (or a 10 for Predictability) and a 0 for Humor. Also, if you make the following derogatory crack poorly disguised as a joke… “I think you’re obsessed with sex” …it would behoove you to make sure I hadn’t proclaimed that fact to the Internets only a day earlier. You get a 0 for Creativity and a 0 for Attempting To Smack Me Around With Your Dick.
READ ME: Disclaimer
17 Responses to "Prince Edward Island, Bitches"
“derogatory crack”… another good band name
Will that be televised?
Sweet Mother of Christ, you sound offended!
Garrett:
Oh my, whatever would give you that idea?
Duane:
Yes, but only on Pay-Per-View. I’ll see what I can do about getting you a discounted rate, though.
Actually, now that I think of it, there’s no possible way to actually grant someone permission to rape you. It’s logically impossible when you consider the definition of rape.
I know your words made it obvious, but I was expressing surprise because you didn’t seem offended at all last night when this discussion went down.
Didn’t I? Guess I’m just good at concealing my true feelings, letting my anger fester and mature inside and later expelling it in unexpected ways, rather than just exploding in a fit of bluster right at the moment.
You like those 50-cent words, don’t you?
And, good call on the definition of rape, but really I just wanted to try and tie it in to the earlier Every Man’s Marriage excerpt which mentioned prison rape.
Speaking of which, I can’t believe this thread has more comments than the previous one.
Damn, gurl… you sure do know your geography.
But there is no legal definition for “ass-rape.”
isn’t there?
No, at least in Georgia, “Rape” is defined only as unconsented penetration of a woman by a man. Anything else (unconsented buggery, unconsented grabbery, etc) is Aggravated Sexual Assault.
No, I’m not a sex offender. I used to work for the cops.
Rape is technically defined differently. We have to add the use of force:
Ga. Code Ann. § 16-6-1 (2005). It may be unfortunate that it requires force, and unlike some other statutes it does not include oral and anal penetration. It is somewhat progressive to include applicability to wives, though.
So I just realized that, to return to the original term, there is no legally recognized “ass-rape” in Georgia but rather an “ass-aggravated sexual assault.”
I can’t believe the definition of rape includes the phrase “carnal knowledge.” So ridiculous.
However, I agree that it’s awesome that it includes the part about it being applicable to wives. Sad that we would even consider something that should be so basic to be “progressive,” but that’s the world we live in. For example, let’s see what Fred Stoeker and Stephen Arterburn have to say about a wife’s role in consenting to sex, in Every Man’s Marriage:
Emphasis mine. Yowza.
Is that out of context? It seems like the first couple sentences indicate that they aren’t saying that that is the *correct* role of a wife. The fact that they say “selfishly asserted his rights at every turn” and then compare such a man to a raping prison guard would seem to imply that he is in the wrong for doing so.
I suppose it is a bit out of context, but I figured it was a big enough chunk of text that people could glean the meaning to an extent - and you did. They are saying that this is an incorrect role/behavior on the part of the husband. However, the clause “After all, she has no right to say no” isn’t framed as part of the wrong role. (The section is discussing the husband’s role anyway, not the wife’s.) This would seem to imply that the wife is basically a victim, since her husband is being an asshole but, as a wife, she is supposed to submit to him and doesn’t have a right to say no, so she’s kind of trapped. (Hence, a victim.)
If this makes no sense, just look how early it is on a Saturday morning.
So, since it’s aggravated assault, not rape, and it’s consenting, your offer would have been doubly impossible.
Well, Adrian, from what I remember, that same section of code also makes it impossible for a drunk woman to consent to sex. I think this is heavyhanded and extremely sexist against men. If a man and his girlfriend both go get to’ up and go home and have sex, that should not be legally considered rape. A man would have no defense in such a situation. I guess it’s a good way to make sure you trust the women you drunk-screw, but it does unfairly stack the deck agin’ men.