A prostitute can be raped?

[Snarky_succubus]

Uh no he didn't say anything about whether the prostitute said stop or not in the original post or his replies. Stop twisting the fact.
He CLEARLY states in his original post:



It is perfectly clear to me from this that nobody said stop to anyone during the intercourse. If the client forced her to have sex when she was refusing it, that quote wouldn't have made any sense. Maybe you should use some of that "deductive reasoning" you love. Clearly not your forte.

According to what you've told me about the contents of this thread (I still haven't read it... nor will I... because again... I don't give a shit)... You seem to be the only one in this thread who came to that assumption. Ever think maybe you're the one who's a little off-base? Your whole argument can be turned right back around on you. You assume that she didn't say stop. OP doesn't specify... Everyone else came to the same conclusion as me. Logic would dictate that in this case, the popular opinion would be the one more likely to be correct.

You say that quote wouldn't make any sense... but that's not true if you account for his English. "Coz client don't pay for extra time"... "don't" could just as easily mean "refused to when confronted during the act of intercourse" as it could mean "didn't pay after the fact".

Give up, idiot. We all got the same information and you came up with a different understanding. Unless the OP clarifies, no one will ever know which of us is right. Personally, I don't give a fuck. Again... for the umpteenth time... The title is enough for me to assume he doesn't accept as fact that prostitutes can be raped.

 

[701757]

According to what you've told me about the contents of this thread (I still haven't read it... nor will I... because again... I don't give a shit)... You seem to be the only one in this thread who came to that assumption. Ever think maybe you're the one who's a little off-base? Your whole argument can be turned right back around on you. You assume that she didn't say stop. OP doesn't specify... Everyone else came to the same conclusion as me. Logic would dictate that in this case, the popular opinion would be the one more likely to be correct.

You say that quote wouldn't make any sense... but that's not true if you account for his English. "Coz client don't pay for extra time"... "don't" could just as easily mean "refused to when confronted during the act of intercourse" as it could mean "didn't pay after the fact".

Give up, idiot. We all got the same information and you came up with a different understanding. Unless the OP clarifies, no one will ever know which of us is right. Personally, I don't give a fuck. Again... for the umpteenth time... The title is enough for me to assume he doesn't accept as fact that prostitutes can be raped.

I'm sure you don't understand. I don't care what the title makes you think.

I have not made any arguments whatsoever about the client, the prostitute, the legality or the ethics of the situation.
Just like how the OP didn't say anything about how the prostitute told the client to stop.

Stop making shit up. I'm only and ONLY trying to tell people that OP didn't say anything about the prostitute telling the client to stop. It did not happen. I am not arguing about ANYTHING ELSE WHATSOEVER. If you think that that's what happened, well good I don't care. That's completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with OP's question.

 

[socalfreak]

I never claimed that either... I am simply making NO ASSUMPTIONS unless OP clarifies the situation. Everyone needs to start asking OP these questions instead of bickering amongst each other about "what might have happened". It's pointless.

Ah...I see.
So, you really don't have anything to add here. You're just playing thread police.
Gotcha.

 

[701757]

Ah...I see.
So, you really don't have anything to add here. You're just playing thread police.
Gotcha.

Yes... It's idiotic that so many people can gang up on someone for absolutely no reason. If OP states that the prostitute did in fact tell his client to stop, then that's a whole other story. People can't just go assuming things, what's the point of discussion then?
I'm happy that you caught on though, thanks.

 

[Snarky_succubus]

I'm sure you don't understand. I don't care what the title makes you think.

I have not made any arguments whatsoever about the client, the prostitute, the legality or the ethics of the situation.
Just like how the OP didn't say anything about how the prostitute told the client to stop.

Stop making shit up. I'm only and ONLY trying to tell people that OP didn't say anything about the prostitute telling the client to stop. It did not happen. I am not arguing about ANYTHING ELSE WHATSOEVER. If you think that that's what happened, well good I don't care. That's completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with OP's question.

LOL priceless... Learn how to debate before you go trying to do so with intelligent people. If the base of your argument is logic, evidence, and not making assumptions... You have to play by those rules, too, fuckwit.
Fact - his English is questionable
Fact - he does not specify whether the prostitute did or did not say stop
You've admitted these things yourself... Which means you are making assumptions too.
The OP did not say the prostitute said "stop". The OP also did not say that the prostitute did not say stop.

PERIOD.

That means you're assuming as much as everyone the fuck else.

The end.

Goodnight.

 

[701757]

LOL priceless... Learn how to debate before you go trying to do so with intelligent people. If the base of your argument is logic, evidence, and not making assumptions... You have to play by those rules, too, fuckwit.
Fact - his English is questionable
Fact - he does not specify whether the prostitute did or did not say stop
You've admitted these things yourself... Which means you are making assumptions too.
The OP did not say the prostitute said "stop". The OP also did not say that the prostitute did not say stop.

PERIOD.

That means you're assuming as much as everyone the fuck else.

The end.

Goodnight.

Lol you keep saying the end and shit like that as if it finishes the argument and you win. It just makes you look more childish.

Back to the point. Holy shit. How thick is your skull? Have you ever heard of "innocent until proven guilty"? I don't know how you don't understand how flawed and ridiculous your argument is.

Your argument is that: "Because the OP didn't state that the prostitute didn't say stop, there's no proof saying she didn't. Therefore, we can proceed with our arguments assuming that she did say stop."

That's like arguing at a court of law that someone is guilty because there's no proof that says he isn't guilty, even though there's also no proof that says he is guilty. LOL are you actually serious? This is exceedingly fucking stupid. Maybe try going to sleep and see if your argument still makes sense to you in the morning.

I am NOT assuming as much as everyone else. I am NOT assuming anything. I am NOT saying that the prostitute didn't say stop, and I'm also NOT saying that she did say stop. Do you get it now? I'm just trying to stop people from making these assumptions and drawing their own useless conclusions.

 

[socalfreak]

Yes... It's idiotic that so many people can gang up on someone for absolutely no reason. If OP states that the prostitute did in fact tell his client to stop, then that's a whole other story. People can't just go assuming things, what's the point of discussion then?
I'm happy that you caught on though, thanks.

Yeah....makes you look like an even bigger ass for going and attempting to chastise somebody for not adding anything here.
Thanks...But we don't need your retarded help.
The site has good moderators.
Nobody asked for guidance....especially from you.

Post your opinion & either move on or discuss the new info.
But, since you have nothing....just jump ahead to the move on part.
Jesus Christ, douche....what, exactly, was the point in all your nonsense?
Are you so naive/new to online stuff that you actually thought you were smarter than everybody & were going to correct everybody's line of thought??
Wow...now that's some impressive gold standard blowhard shit right there.
Anyway, good to see you out yourself.

 

[701757]

Yeah....makes you look like an even bigger ass for going and attempting to chastise somebody for not adding anything here.
Thanks...But we don't need your retarded help.
The site has good moderators.
Nobody asked for guidance....especially from you.

Post your opinion & either move on or discuss the new info.
But, since you have nothing....just jump ahead to the move on part.
Jesus Christ, douche....what, exactly, was the point in all your nonsense?
Are you so naive/new to online stuff that you actually thought you were smarter than everybody & were going to correct everybody's line of thought??
Wow...now that's some impressive gold standard blowhard shit right there.
Anyway, good to see you out yourself.

I think that's it's necessary for someone to point that out. Moderators are clearly not helping and that's not their job anyway. I'm not "outing" myself, I wasn't trying to hide what I was doing under the disguise of arguing for a side.

Also, I don't have much to say about the issue yet because the OP has a lot to clarify. This is just a stupid fucking question now that's leading everyone to make their own assumptions because by itself it's not complete. I'm not claiming to be smarter than anyone but it is a very simple to understand fact that people made an assumption about the prostitute saying stop. At the end of the day, that's an assumption and makes your argument invalid if you base it off of that because OP didn't state it. It's stupid to see pages and pages of pointless arguments proving nothing.

 

[socalfreak]

Lol you keep saying the end and shit like that as if it finishes the argument and you win. It just makes you look more childish.

Back to the point. Holy shit. How thick is your skull? Have you ever heard of "innocent until proven guilty"? I don't know how you don't understand how flawed and ridiculous your argument is.

Your argument is that: "Because the OP didn't state that the prostitute didn't say stop, there's no proof saying she didn't. Therefore, we can proceed with our arguments assuming that she did say stop."

That's like arguing at a court of law that someone is guilty because there's no proof that says he isn't guilty, even though there's also no proof that says he is guilty. LOL are you actually serious? This is exceedingly fucking stupid. Maybe try going to sleep and see if your argument still makes sense to you in the morning.

I am NOT assuming as much as everyone else. I am NOT assuming anything. I am NOT saying that the prostitute didn't say stop, and I'm also NOT saying that she did say stop. Do you get it now? I'm just trying to stop people from making these assumptions and drawing their own useless conclusions.

And, bonehead, "innocent until proven guilty" does not apply in many countries.
In Mexico, for example, you are guilty until proven innocent.
So, you're assuming this happened in some place like the U.S......Without proof.
Again,..hypocrite.

 

[socalfreak]

I think that's it's necessary for someone to point that out. Moderators are clearly not helping and that's not their job anyway. I'm not "outing" myself, I wasn't trying to hide what I was doing under the disguise of arguing for a side.

Also, I don't have much to say about the issue yet because the OP has a lot to clarify. This is just a stupid fucking question now that's leading everyone to make their own assumptions because by itself it's not complete. I'm not claiming to be smarter than anyone but it is a very simple to understand fact that people made an assumption about the prostitute saying stop. At the end of the day, that's an assumption and makes your argument invalid if you base it off of that because OP didn't state it. It's stupid to see pages and pages of pointless arguments proving nothing.

I agree. you should've shut up and let it go ages ago.

 

[701757]

And, bonehead, "innocent until proven guilty" does not apply in many countries.
In Mexico, for example, you are guilty until proven innocent.
So, you're assuming this happened in some place like the U.S......Without proof.
Again,..hypocrite.

I can't believe you're advocating something as retarded as guilty until proven innocent. Besides, I wasn't arguing about whether the client is guilty or not. You must have not read that part of my post where I was simply drawing a parallel between how:

- Someone shouldn't be found guilty just because charges have been laid on them with no proof
and
- OP shouldn't be accused of asking such a ridiculous question when there's no proof of him stating that the prostitute said stop

 

[socalfreak]

I can't believe you're advocating something as retarded as guilty until proven innocent. Besides, I wasn't arguing about whether the client is guilty or not. You must have not read that part of my post where I was simply drawing a parallel between how:

- Someone shouldn't be found guilty just because charges have been laid on them with no proof
and
- OP shouldn't be accused of asking such a ridiculous question when there's no proof of him stating that the prostitute said stop

I simply stated the fact...that, in many places, you are guilty until proven innocent.
Feel free to look it up.
Whether you or I agree with the laws of that country is irrelevant

 

[701757]

I simply stated the fact...that, in many places, you are guilty until proven innocent.
Feel free to look it up

Again, has nothing to do with my argument. Please read my post more carefully.

 

[socalfreak]

Again, has nothing to do with my argument. Please read my post more carefully.

That's not true.
Read what you've posted & which post I replied to.
Don't run away now.
Or...just be a grown up & say something like :" ok. Yeah...I didn't consider that."

 

[701757]

That's not true.
Read what you've posted & which post I replied to.
Don't run away now.
Or...just be a grown up & say something like :" ok. Yeah...I didn't consider that."

No, I used innocent until proven guilty as an example of an ethical value that reasonable human beings should hold.
You should not assume that someone is guilty unless there's any proof that they are.
In this case, there is no proof.
Hence, you should assume that OP is innocent until said proof is presented.

 

[socalfreak]

No, I used innocent until proven guilty as an example of an ethical value that reasonable human beings should hold.
You should not assume that someone is guilty unless there's any proof that they are.
In this case, there is no proof.
Hence, you should assume that OP is innocent until said proof is presented.

No. You're trying to apply a legal standard that may not be valid based on the location of the incident. You are only under the impression that it's moral or ethical because that's what your used to in your country.
Are you saying that laws in those countries are immoral or unethical? many feel the same of us.

 

[701757]

No. You're trying to apply a legal standard that may not be valid based on the location of the incident. You are only under the impression that it's moral or ethical because that's what your used to in your country.
Are you saying that laws in those countries are immoral or unethical? many feel the same of us.

I didn't apply anything whatsoever, I drew a parallel between presumption of innocence and how OP shouldn't be assumed to have said that the prostitute said stop. That's it.

On a side note though, yes those countries are either immoral, corrupt or both.

 

[socalfreak]

I didn't apply anything whatsoever, I drew a parallel between presumption of innocence and how OP shouldn't be assumed to have said that the prostitute said stop. That's it.

On a side note though, yes those countries are either immoral, corrupt or both.

Again, presumption of innocence is a concept from American law...not a moral issue.

And, on a side note,....Wow. way to offend half the world in one stupid sentence.lol

 

[701757]

Again, presumption of innocence is a concept from American law...not a moral issue.

And, on a side note,....Wow. way to offend half the world in one stupid sentence.lol

Half of the world? Lol definitely not. Also, it's not an American concept, have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

And yet again, how many times am I going to have to say this lol. In real life situations, the same thing applies so I was merely using it to draw a parallel. You shouldn't accuse someone of something in the absence of proof that they did it.

 

[socalfreak]

Half of the world? Lol definitely not. Also, it's not an American concept, have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

And yet again, how many times am I going to have to say this lol. In real life situations, the same thing applies so I was merely using it to draw a parallel. You shouldn't accuse someone of something in the absence of proof that they did it.

Wow. you really are a moron. you put up a link that supports my point & try to claim victory. Lmao. did you miss all that about it being from the legal system & English common law? what a tool.
in any event....
Nobody needs/wants you to help out with forums.
We do just fine without your retarded ass.
Lol.
Now, stop wasting your parent's Wi-Fi & get a real job. Lmao