Okay anons let us discuss. One fault that bugs me is women believe

>>739797265
I wonder if that dog will listen to her when she yells, "No!" as it tears out her throat.

>>739797393
Would fap to that

the "teach boys not to rape" argument is flawed because nobody who's committing rapes was all that stable in the first place
a violent sexual criminal didn't grow up learning all the social mores expected of him, to say the least
if these are people who either do not differentiate right and wrong or no longer care about any differentiation they do understand, they cannot be "taught" not to do wrong
this is why preventative policies, e.g. self-defense/fight-or-flight training, remaining in a group, wearing clothing not favored by perpetrators of violent rape (skirts and whatnot), taking a long way home if it doesn't take you through a dangerous neighbourhood, etc. are much more useful to protect women from rape
it isn't victim blaming; anyone with a brain knows there's no such thing as "asking for it;" but the long and short of it is that rapists would much rather attack a victim in a miniskirt than one in snowpants over jeans over spandex shorts. rape prevention education from the victim's side, therefore, is endlessly more useful than education from the attacker's side, i.e. this "teach boys don't rape/no means no" shit

>>739797864
Bless you anon for taking your time to type this

The dog has no free will and no morality, so it's a poor argument.

>>739797864
Well said. Not sure I can add anything to that. Other than any parent really should train their child in both physical self defence and how to read and defuse a situation.

Violence whether sexual or otherwise could happen to anybody at any time. A proactive defence at an instinctual reflex level can get you out of a situation before it escalates into something harder to deal with. Whether it be flight, calling somebody on a mobile or recording/streaming events or having to do it the hard way and resort to physicality to extricate themselves from the danger.

Also being used to the adrenaline rush helps, although it's a valuable physical response for a physical situation it does kinda give you tunnel vision and very narrow focus. It's difficult to think and plan more than a single step ahead. You need to learn to stop outside of it and be cold, icier than cool headed, absolute clarity while your body runs on reflex motions. Most people attacking will be physically amped up and under the influence of an adrenaline surge too, so if you're able to think, you have the edge.

What exactly is the discussion here

>>739797265
jee golly gosh why don't they teach these people not to rape or murder, there should be a law about this sort of thing. i can't imagine this criminals wont stop doing it if someone just tells them to stop and not do it because it's wrong AND illegal.

>>739797864


>>739799540
It seems to be, why do women think saying no will stop, or dissuade a very nasty person, from doing anything essentially, but in this case rape.

Pretty sure op is missing the point though.

Image is right. If your dog doesn't conform to the standards set by society and hurts someone, he is put down.

The same needs to be done to rapists, humans who refuse to accept the life of others.

Act like a wild animal, be treated like one.

>>739799540
the discussion, as i tried to steer it to, is currently "how much can we circlejerk about the incorrectness of 'teach boys not to rape rather than teach girls how to not get raped'"

>>739797265
That dog knows she will eventually feed him, he doesn't have to steal it. He is rewarded by shortly abstaining. To liken that to a rapist is absurd in every way you could think about it.

>>739799717
I get the point she's making that a dog can be better than a human who doesn't understand the word no. My point is why would the word no stop a human who doesn't care for the word? It is an illogical request to make from the victims standpoint. Protect yourself with weapons or something besides a word.

>>739799931
It's kind of funny if there were a mailman that came to her house and the dog barks at it, he thinks he scared away the mailman from doing anything other than delivering the mail like he's a threat.
somehow she thinks being there and talking does the same thing. i'd like to see her tell the dog not to eat the steak and leave the room for a few minutes while leaving the steak and dog there alone.

The point isn't to appeal to the 1% psychotic deviants. It's to about the whole furore over fucking girls passed out behind dumpsters.

That kid might be a psychotic deviant but he might also have been drunk and uninhibited. However, if you murder someone drunk and uninhibited it's still murder, and even drunk he wouldn't have crossed that line, but he did cross the lack of consent line.

I don't really have a dog in the fight, I've fucked my gf while she was sleeping and she's done it to me. We were both happy to wake up or pass out like that. But we were in a relationship, not just some random party girl who was up for it earlier. I guess my dog in the fight is the dude. I might have done the same thing, but then I was drilled with no means no all my life, so maybe I wouldn't.

Hard to say in that situation, but ordinarily if a girl was digging it, then she said no, I'd stop and ask why, try to settle her down or let her leave etc. I think that's fairly normal behaviour, no means no drill or not. That's just nature vs nurture, in some people the procreation urge overcomes social bindings.

File: images (76).jpg (19KB, 344x291px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 344x291px

>>739798673
Thanks Aristotle.

>>739797265
By that logic, "No" should also be a perfectly valid answer to "stop raping me"

>>739797864
OK, then by that argument, walking around with your phone out is an invitation to be robbed, going into a bar is an invitation to be beaten up...

As a male raised before "no means no" bullshit. I don't need to be taught that no means no when you asking for some loving and she says.. no. Right so whoever doesn't get that simply doesn't understand why it the woman is saying no because he thinks his actions aren't wrong. He believes what he is doing is correct for him. If that dog was not trained he would grab that steak so fast that bitch couldn't get the N from her mouth. The dog did something good in his eyes. He got him a good meal and that's all that matters. Whatever setting the person was born in leads to their morality and decision making.

File: 1406977247811.png (42KB, 305x312px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 305x312px

ITT: Fucking edgelords wanking each other

>>739800609
>>739799844

>>739800648
Wow. Aren't you even edgier. Care to throw in a hand while you get jerked. Or pretend you don't agree. Either or faggot.

>>739797265
I live in respect of "no", and i'm 30 virgil kissless. When i ask why to women they say: "you have to push more, otherwise she thing you don't care of her"

>>739800435
Yes...
Walking around distracted with valuables in your hands is a good way to be robbed. Walking into a seedy bar increases your chances of an altercation.

That is why humans have an inbuilt risk assessment, and what we might do in the safety of our homes, we wouldn't do at Skid row:LA

>>739800721
Are you literally retarded?

>>739800435

In a way, yeah. But when you do those things, you are accepting the possibility of any negative consequences.

You don't say shit in a bar that would piss people off, you don't wave your phone around in a bad neighborhood, and you don't walk alone at night. If you decide to do any of these things, despite knowing what the results could be, you have failed to protect yourself. It isn't your fault it happened per say, but you ARE the person who put themselves at risk.

>>739797265
>They think that this word will stop a human being without morality. That alone makes her argument invalid.
THANK YOU! No means NO to moral people. Everyone knows that except the anti-rape political crusaders. Anti-rape political crusaders seem oblivious to the FACT that just about everyone is against rape.

>>739800883
I am on /b/. So probably yeah

>>739800435
it is not about "invitation," it's about statistics, it's about crime pathology
rape victims follow a pattern and perpetrators, especially repeat offenders, are more than happy to describe their victim selection criteria
they look for clothing that is easy to remove, women that aren't holding onto anything that could be used as a weapon, etc. etc.
as i said, there is NO such thing as "asking for it." consent is real. however, for the 0.01% of males who are violent rapists, no doesn't mean no, and at no point in their lives could they have been taught quote-unquote not to rape. as such, for those cases, it is not victim blaming to try to educate women on what they can do to be less likely to be victimized, it's just foresight.

File: vehicle-safety-sign-k-7804_pl.png (74KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 800x800px

>>739801214
/this
>Don't leave valuables in your car
Ok
>Don't be 17, lost, drunk, alone and dressed like a whore
Omg muh rights, do what i want

>>739798673
fuck you mean b
No one has free will. Humans don't have free will lmao.

Also dogs definitely have morality. It isn't as good as humans' morality but dogs still have it. They evolved from wolves who stay in a pack and help each other out. If wolves didn't have morality and just attacked each other or some shit they wouldn't survive.

If you think about it, morality is just another trait that "evolved" (whether genetically or culturally) to help our species survive.

>>739797265

This is only an issue because whiny cunts abused trust

There is nothing principally wrong here, this is a one-hundred percent functioning notion-- if someone says no, it means no, that's pretty fuckin' easy. If that isn't easy, I don't know what more I can say.

The only reason we could argue is because there are people who manipulate sensitive contexts to put people in vulnerable positions, and there are natural inclinations to believe the vulnerable which these fucking sociopathic perma-victims definitely have good practice acting like. We really just need to nut up and start holding this shit to a higher standard again, but as soon as you suggest pulling up pants and doing actual fucking work in modern society, everyone's shit gets in a twist and they turn into fucking slugs who do nothing but complain.

The principle is correct; I'm even willing to bet the person is sane and responding to a particular target group or event. But the message tends to be espoused by people who make the decision like, as the guy is inside her, they're like 'naw mebbe neh' or they decide after that they didn't want it and call it rape then.

Y'all just gotta realize there's a single common enemy here, attacking people who clearly do not rape others and clearly do not abuse a system is just a waste of time. It's like throwing the message everywhere, no shit rape is bad, we all fuckin' know it-- you think rapists are magically going to stop raping because you said no? The whole pretense is that they don't give a shit. Getting mad at the rest of us is what's casting perfectly sensible principles into the mud.

>>739800009
almost quints

>>739801599
>>739800000

>>739800435
You are a fucking idiot that ignores facts. Go back to tumblr and reddit you waste of fucking oxygen. Do you even read anyone elses comments before touching that krusty keyboard of yours?

>>739801524
>Humans don't have free will lmao.
Why do you think this?
I 'could' punch you in the nose, but i recognize my right to swing my arm ends at your nose. I could drag you from a room, or you could leave by yourself, and re recognize those are two separate things.
And if you think where all puppets of God plan, The Devil knows more than anyone that God exists and exactly how powerful he is, and was still able to choose to reject him.

Because you are right here:
>morality is just another trait that "evolved"

>>739797265
As a guy, and you honestly think because of what a woman wears, she's asking to be raped; you're a fucking absolute piece of shit and an animal that can't control his own base instincts.
Not a white knight or an SJW but it's a disgusting mentality and there's something seriously wrong with your brain if you think that's a reasonable excuse.

>>739802005
people are going to hate on this post but it's 100% truth tbh

>>739802005
*if you honestly think
Wasn't accusing you, OP

>>739802005
Imagine yourself as a rapist. Would you rather rape a woman with a mini-skirt, or jeans?
>inb4
>but I would nevur do that!! don't say that!!!

>>739800009
She's also implying
>Dog naturally take the food
>Men naturally rape women
Which is fallacious: Secondarily;
>She always feeds her dog, He doesn't have to take it
>She doesn't fuck rapists, They have to take it
The analogy is flawed in every way you think about it, Assuming her point is a word 'no' has any special power.

>>739802005
So lets say a serial rapist is on the prowl, he spots a woman in a police station wearing a police uniform, and a stupid teeny bopper wearing her finest slut attire in the dark carpark of a seedy nightclub. Who do you think is getting the Dick?
Humans are opportunists, almost every crime boils down to this, And young girls are attention whores, they'll dress like professionals at 15 if their allowed without even seen a real dick.

You really need others to tell you walking around with your tits hanging out while drunk isn't a good idea?

I'm not even saying she doesn't have a right to, or a right to be safe, But there are shitty shitty crazy people out in the real world, and as humans we make risk assessments constantly.

I wouldn't drive around the Detroit Hoods in a pimp Escalade and leave it at a gas pump with the engine running and keys in it, Would you?

>>739802170
kek at that preposterous question

File: 85169078.jpg (71KB, 600x700px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 600x700px

I fucked a chubby girl in college and dumped her a few days later for a much hotter chick. Fatty texts me one night after and says "you raped me the other night and I'm thinking of pressing charges". I called that bitch with a tape recorder and got her to admit on the phone that she only said it because she was mad I dumped her. I told her that I recorded the conversation and I was going straight to the police myself if I ever heard from her again. That was the last I ever heard from that fat bitch.

>>739803290
I agree. That's like asking sweet tea Vs unsweetened tea. The choice doesn't matter the person has already chosen to rape. My bets on him not waiting for the first miniskirt whore to walk by but the drunkest or easiest.

>>739797265
If Bree Wiseman wants to dress like a slut then fine,
If she needs to learn the hard way that rapists dont care about her views or feelings just her snatch then fine. Let her learn the hard way

>>739797393
If the dog is trained well that won't be something she needs to worry about
>but muh lockjaw pibull 200% fatality nigger bluh bluh bluh

>>739797864
I agree brother, these immodest women will cover their knees and ankles, praise Allah

>>739804282
I think anon's point was;
If it wanted to rip her throat out, It could and would
Saying 'no' won't save her, nor will saying 'no' to violent serial rapist. 'No' will stop a moral person the same way a padlock will keep out an opportunist, Neither will stop a criminal.

But here is a (you) for the attempted pitbull derail

>>739804582
Pretty terrible analogy innit

>>739802675
>wearing a normal fucking skirt
>tits hanging out while drunk
How exactly did we get from A to B in this thread? The arguments only stick in ridiculously extreme hypotheticals?

>>739801838
> i have free will
> for i can freely chose from a limited number of behaviors

>>739802675
I don't think these retards understand that some people rape and them calling them a bad person doesn't matter because they get the power trip they want while they rape

>>739804922
Because sometimes we make points by the ridiculousness of the extreme, and let the person(s) where talking to find their own scale of reasonableness.

Driving at 200mph down the freeway is a bad idea.
So is driving 190, 180, 170, 160mph down the freeway.
The argument is "Don't speed" Not "How fast 'is' too fast" - Because is't arbitrary to the conversation.

>>739805228
>arguing with someone who believe in satan

>>739805370
Yeah, no. If a woman wears a skirt, it's a totally different thing from stumbling drunk down the street slapping her bare tits

>>739805228
How is freely choosing between two things different from choosing from hundreds, thousands or millions of actions?

I could shoot you.
I could shoot me.
I could do both.
I could do a polka dance and masturbate on a cat

How does having choices, or implying there are limited choices effect my will to choose?

>>739805488
Yeah.. That IS the point.
You've come this far only to discover what we've been saying all along. Good Work.

>>739805586
Free will is an illusion. You only think you have these choices, but what you will choose, how your mind operates, has already been decided by previous conditions (brain chemistry, past experiences, every little thought and counterthought that arises to events and an environment beyond your control. When the first particles got their quantum spin on in the beginning of the universe, the rest of eternity was decided by those conditions.

>>739805721
So skirts are ok again? We're making progress ITT

>>739805768
>how your mind operates,
How your mind operates is:
>You've already subconsciously made a choice
>You consciously try to rationalize that choice

>quantum spin on in the beginning of the universe
Is complete conjecture

>>739806006
All those rationalizations are just reactions programmed by past experience, genetics, and what you had for breakfast

>>739805811
The thread has, but some retard is sitting in the corner asking stupid shit about skirts rather than addressing anything even close to the issues at hand raised by Op and his post.

>>739797265
This dog looks properly fed

>>739806148
OP's post is full retard

>>739797265
That dog also knows that he's going to get some of that eventually.

>>739806122
We have the ability to change our mind, or rationalize a different action.
Please continue with
>Free will is an illusion
If you agree with
>>739806006

>>739797265
no

>>739806251
dogs beg at every meal regardless if you feed them scraps, they wait for crumbs to drop and can't help stare at delicious smelling food regardless of expectations

>>739806361
>We have the ability to change our mind, or rationalize a different action.
Than the action you were always, inevitably going to ration yourself towards? No, you really can't, and your attempts to prove the existence of free will are very weak

>>739797265
wtf does a bloodmouth know...

>>739801524
>If wolves didn't have morality and just attacked each other or some shit they wouldn't survive.
They're literally almost extinct
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th9_s9mf2ZU

>>739801666
xd jebaited

>>739806600
Because of wolf-on-wolf murder? Doubt it.

File: 1500278473459.gif (315KB, 234x159px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 234x159px

>>739797265
This guy is basically calling women dogs

>>739806397
You can stare all you want , but you also have to respect the other person . My dog may beg but he doesnt try to eat my food even when he can.

>>739806556
So i don't know if you're just to stupid, But i'm asking you a question.

Do you think everything that has, is or will ever happen is pre-determined? And if so why do you think this.

'If I had a red and green balloon, and you wanted the red one, but i convinced you to take the green one.'
Did the entire existence of the universe lead to you taking the green one, or did you freely choose to take the green even if you wanted the red?

>>739806785
Pre-determination seems to imply planning or will. Everything that will happened arises from the conditions preceding it.

>>739806896
>conditions preceding it.
Is free will to choose not a condition preceding it?
Is the existence of a mind or minds not a factor?

>>739807041
>Is free will to choose not a condition preceding it?
This sentence doesn't mean anything
>Is the existence of a mind or minds not a factor?
Minds aren't magic, just mushy computers programmed by experience and genetics.

>>739806698
Look animals don't really give a shit about anyone. They're selfish little creatures and the domesticated ones are simply trained to display that sort of behavior, they only feel compelled to do it out of fear. It's not some deep moral instinct. You freaking nut jobs that think animals are so much more deep and honest than humans are so naive. Some of these animals are raised as captives that they don't develop the instincts to not feel reliant on their captors, they don't have a lot of thought capacity or any morals they're simply too ignorant to do anything different. A lot of them though as soon as they think nobody is watching will do things differently than they do when being watched and that moral shit is so far from fucking true they just feel that they'll get punished if caught rather than having morals that make them feel like they shouldn't do it.

>>739807447
Are you high? How does telling you wolves aren't responsible for their own extinction set you off on such a retarded rant?

>>739807141
Minds are a product of our brains.

The question is, Can we freely choose between a red or green balloon? Can we be persuaded to change our choice? Can we rationalize our own choice and change it?

And at this point if you answer with
>implying minds are magic
>I'm ignoring a question
After directly asking you now several times, i'm going to assume you're unable to even 'make' a choice and am done with you. Or you can answer honestly with "I don't know" , "I'll have to think more about it" or even "I'm not saying it 'is' Pre-determined, But it's Pre-determined - Final answer"

>>739807601
Your questions are childish

>Can we freely choose between a red or green balloon?
Have you been paying attention? What is my stance on free will?
>Can we be persuaded to change our choice?
sure. If I'm a pushover personality wise, because of genetics or childhood upbringing or whatever, I'm especially likely to allow my initial choice to be altered by an external force.
>Can we rationalize our own choice and change it?
Yes. But this is all just going through the motions, you imagine this is free will because you cannot see the myriad factors that determine what you will ultimately decide, all at play at once.

>>739807533
Things are responsible for not letting themselves go extinct. Not always a whole lot they can really do about it, but it's still their own personal responsibility.

If you died you think anyone is going to think you were not responsible for not letting yourself die? People would love to watch it happen and talk about how dumb you were for having it happen to you because it was your responsibility to avoid it.

>>739808077
ok

>>739807845
Ok, so the reason (way above) I asked about about religion was people who believe in pre-determinism usually believe "It's God's plan" - And i wouldn't have wasted my time.

You're both saying you don't believe in pre-determinism: But everything IS pre-determined. You believe this while accepting we can change or alter our choices which could lead to any number of outcomes. This is nonsensical.
Implying an outcome is the only possible outcome because it's the one that happened is a fallacy.

File: 1500274769232.jpg (76KB, 640x829px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 640x829px

>Leave fresh steaming steak sitting outside in the arctic wilderness
>Pack of wolves come eat it
>Don't tell me I should look out for my steak and fucked up badly, I'm a victim!

>>739797265
That dog will one day kill its owner because of its breed and genetics.
>>739797393
This
Also I'm having the strangest deja vu

>>739797265
Well I think the point they've been making is that "no" doesn't work, and it's supposed to.

>>739808293
We can engage in internal debate, a mere show. Those debates and the choices they arrive at are determined by precinditions, don't know if many more ways to explain this to you

>>739800435
>When the feminist starts to get it subconsciously but is still actively regressing into "reality must submit to my wants" mode

>>739808821
Was that a counter point to those examples? Didn't seem like it.

>>739800609
This. A moral person is going to be moral no matter what the situation, whereas a criminal has already decided not to follow the common rules of society.
Guys, teach your children right and wrong - don't worry about the politically correct bullshit. Raise your little ones to be good people, better than even you are, and you'll have done right by the world with them.
Women, unless your opinion matches above, shut the fuck up because we don't care.

>>739808705
Because you haven't.
You keep asserting pre-determinism while ignoring choice as a variable, and furthermore engaged with:

>>739807845
>Can we freely choose between a red or green balloon?
{Paraphrasing} No
>Can we be persuaded to change our choice?
Yes
>>Can we rationalize our own choice and change it?
Yes

We are unable to choose, but we can have our choice internally and externally influenced?

You sir are profoundly confused about reality, or are to suborn to accept a conclusion.

>>739797265
>If a dog is better behaved than you are, you need to reevaluate your life
Hey, tell that to the rapist, not me
But don't be surprised if he ignores your advice and just rapes you anyway

>>739799844
You really comfortable having the death penalty for that? Bitches lie about rape all the time, this would make it easier for them to commit murder by proxy.

>>739809045
You keep assuming these choices come from the magic mind that is beyond the world of conditioned and genetic predispositions as well as situational and environmental factors. You think I don't realize you loaded all the questions about choice? It is only sensible to discuss choice on a practical, operational level. We both (I thought) know what the word means in this context, the mental process it points to. This doesn't mean the "choices" we make are products of free will, the free will argument relates to choice on an ultimate rather than practical level.

>>739797265
To borrow a little from OP's picture...
A well trained dog will obey instructions.
Trusting a random dog around your steak is foolish.
Just because one person accepts responsibility for their actions and respects others, you cannot count on all people to do so.

>>739809265
So stop eating steak

>>739809245
This threads going to 404 before we say anything else meaningful (most likely)
Ty for chat, i'll reflect on what's been said for another time.

>>739809435
10-4 over and out

>>739808666
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4anpxoHkPI

>>739810391
Because No stops everything...

File: J_F_Sebastian.jpg (9KB, 295x221px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 295x221px

Your dog likes you, men don't, men have every reason to hate and fear you given that every law favors you. The law favors women so much that the ideal way for women to exit any situation is either totally oblivious or totally dead. Women know they're getting control over the law and there's just no reason to trust one to make any accurate report about anything that's happened. If a woman sees you do ANYTHING wrong you should brain her with a hammer or shoot her or something because if every punishment for men is going to be MAXIMUM FUCK we might as well just leave lots of mysterious dead women lying around.

As for the cunt's argument I don't care, that pit bull is the weapon of a drug dealer who's been caught too many times with guns and she has no business with that exceptionally dumb little monster. I'd probably kill this cunt just for the blow I half-expect she might be holding.