Social constructs purely exist only in the mind of an individual and how the individual recognize and communicate about objects that exist in the natural world. Thus, when it comes to concepts like consent, it can be regarded as a social construct. Therefore, just because one person did not give consent to have sexual intercourse it cannot be considered as rape because it only registers as rape in the individual's mind. I mean, when animals engage in sexual intercourse, do we consider it as rape? Of course not.
10 comments
Fuck it! Sometimes you just gotta say it! I'll turn in my humanity card after I say this. I hope you get raped. I hope the woman who is the complete opposite of what you consider attractive ties you to a bed and stimulates your prostate. I hope she gags you and forces you to listen while she talks about how sexy she feels and how hot her partner thinks she is. I hope she spends hours telling you about all the awesome sex she has that you never will. When you report this to the police, I hope they laugh at you and tell you they can't do anything because consent is an arbitrary social construct.
Social constructs purely exist only in the mind of an individual and how the individual recognize and communicate about objects that exist in the natural world. Thus, when it comes to concepts like consent, it can be regarded as a social construct. Therefore, just because one person did not give consent to have one-way resource transfer it cannot be considered as robbery because it only registers as robbery in the individual's mind. I mean, when animals engage in one-way resource, do we consider it as robbery? Of course not.
Social constructs are what societies use to police themselves and their members, which does not necessarily make them bad.
As for consent, well, I fail to see any drawback.
And I concur with others about the fact that the women around him should take a strap-on to his arse. We would then see if consent is not important for him.
Money is a social construct. It doesn't exist in nature. it's an agreed upon fantasy that X many dollars is worth Y much labor in exchange for Z amounts of car, food, services or pussy.
So, since the individual decides what these constructs are worth, it would be meaningless for Looksie to complain about 'theft' is someone knocked him down and robbed him.
That's what he's saying, right? If he doesn't recognize that women can withhold consent, he doesn't have to agree that it's rape. So if we don't recognize that he has a right to own property, we can take it without concern for repercussions.
That's the logic I see Looksie flogging, anyway.
Naw, this is just special pleading. When people make arguments along these lines, it's because sex is just different . All that other stuff, the rules just make practical sense and we should follow them. But sex is [sacred / filthy / a natural act not bound by human social conventions]. So we should follow the kind of logic which leads to humans being treated as [abstract entities who can't meaningfully be harmed / breeding livestock] and not people, but on the subject of sexuality only.
Social constructs aren't about how you deal with objects it's how you deal with people
So "forcing our social constructs on others" is bad, but forcibly SEXUALLY ASSAULTING someone, that's just fine?
And why do you (if you do) draw the line at rape? By this guy's line of reasoning, it's just as fine to kill someone, right? Murder is no worse than assisted suicide if you don't care about consent. And, hey, animals kill each other all the time, we don't consider that murder, right?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
