Going back to the original question as to when is it rape, if a woman is married to "Satan" and she has to ask, then get professional help now! A man that will beat or force a woman doesn't have any self control and rape is horrible, death is worse. Get out and get help if the question has to be asked.
Going back to the original question as to when is it rape, if a woman is married to "Satan" and she has to ask, then get professional help now! A man that will beat or force a woman doesn't have any self control and rape is horrible, death is worse. Get out and get help if the question has to be asked.
I think here, the question does need to be asked and discussed. Kathy, you know I think the world of you, but this whole due benevelonce thing makes me want to puke my guts out. TWI used it to shame and guilt women into sex. They used it to teach men they had a right to force himself on his wife (afterall, once married your body is not your own).
I would think, if a marriage is good, neither "due benevelonce" or "your body is not your own" would ever be something that needed to be discussed. The sexual relationship (barring physical ailment) would be good. When 'due benevelonce' is not occuring, it is a symptom of a marital problem - whatever that problem is, needs to be fixed THEN the due benevelonce will be fixed too. It doesn't work the other way around. You can fake it - you can go through the motions, but you no longer having lovemaking. All you have is one, or maybe two, people getting their rocks off. Nothing wrong with that, if that is what the two people want, but I would think within the context of a marriage, people would want more than that - at least most of the time.
If a woman in a marriage chooses to withhold sex from her husband and walks around him in a nightgown, gets naked in front of him, sleeps next to him every night and never ever gives him due benevolence and then one night he scoots over to her and shows his desire for her and she slams him down then she can get her butt out of that bed and go move somewhere alone.
I'll say it again... he can get a divorce. he does have a choice about staying. if a woman is withholding sex out of spite, a whole lot more is going on and if the dude is all that, wtf is he sticking around for?
I'm getting confused about what you're talking about exactly, because now it sounds like the wife is rebuffing an advance, and if he backs off thats not rape and she's a liar. before it sounded like you were saying he got sick of not getting laid and had sex with his wife. the former, not rape and a woman calling rape is a liar. the latter, rape no matter what her behavior. if he wants sex, why is he married to a woman who won't have it with him?
Chatty K, I don't think anyone in this thread said she went into marriage with the intent to withold sex from her husband.
Don't you think after years of neglect and/or abuse, some husbands might get pretty doggone unappealing?
Linda, this has gotten way more complicated than I ever imagined it would so I will try and make sense of this part.
I was using the fact a woman withholding sex all the time, not just when she should be for good reasons that I know exist, but when she never ever gave her husband relations and the man in time approached her wanting to have that from his wife. In those times I would agree that he should still not force himself on her but I am also saying if she then uses that as a cry for rape when she should have either left him or flat out told him before they got married she never intended to have sex with him she is using a horrible situation that happens to women for other reasons and giving cause to make all rapes questionable. She is not helping the women that were pulled into the bushes, given drugs to knock them off balance so they couldn't defend themselves, etc a more difficult time.
If you marry someone according to every understanding I have had you are agreeing to a relationship. If you do not want to ever have sex then state it up front. And that alone makes no sense to me, but I guess folks marry with no intentions of having marital relations.
I think here, the question does need to be asked and discussed. Kathy, you know I think the world of you, but this whole due benevelonce thing makes me want to puke my guts out. TWI used it to shame and guilt women into sex. They used it to teach men they had a right to force himself on his wife (afterall, once married your body is not your own).
I would think, if a marriage is good, neither "due benevelonce" or "your body is not your own" would ever be something that needed to be discussed. The sexual relationship (barring physical ailment) would be good. When 'due benevelonce' is not occuring, it is a symptom of a marital problem - whatever that problem is, needs to be fixed THEN the due benevelonce will be fixed too. It doesn't work the other way around. You can fake it - you can go through the motions, but you no longer having lovemaking. All you have is one, or maybe two, people getting their rocks off. Nothing wrong with that, if that is what the two people want, but I would think within the context of a marriage, people would want more than that - at least most of the time.
Yes Abi, yes you are right it was shoved down our throats. And gawd forbid if I didn't mean to appear I was going that place with it. And agreed also that something could go wrong afterwards, yes that is also true. I just had no idea my thoughts put to words would ever be so misunderstood. I have had to speak of something just to make this mess make sense that will possibly cost me dearly. Too late now. I have to live with the consequences. And still with all my personal risks I still can't seem to make people understand me.
I love you Abi, gawd knows I had planned to be with you and Sushi on that sweet day of yours because of my love for you both. I don't want to hurt you in any way.
I know what you are talking about also, all too well do I understand.
I just find it insane that women would willingly marry a man then never allow him to be intimate with her from the start. And then think she has the right to use rape to gain revenge against him. It just makes my head want to explode.
I'll say it again... he can get a divorce. he does have a choice about staying. if a woman is withholding sex out of spite, a whole lot more is going on and if the dude is all that, wtf is he sticking around for?
I'm getting confused about what you're talking about exactly, because now it sounds like the wife is rebuffing an advance, and if he backs off thats not rape and she's a liar. before it sounded like you were saying he got sick of not getting laid and had sex with his wife. the former, not rape and a woman calling rape is a liar. the latter, rape no matter what her behavior. if he wants sex, why is he married to a woman who won't have it with him?
You might have an answer now based on my posts to Linda and Abi. Possibly anyway.
We all know the guy in the mask invading your life thru a window with a knife – then forcing themselves on you is rape.
But what other things are and are not rape in your opinion?
Two fifteen year-olds have consensual sex. They are both under age. Are they raping each other?
A fifteen-year-old sexually active girl and an 18-year-old boy date and have sex. They had sex when he was 17 – but now that he is 18 does it become rape?
If a person gets a person drunk with the intent to “have sex “ is that rape or should the girl/guy not have drank so much?
If a person has sex with a person who is mentally challenged is it rape?
If someone is seeking help, say with a Doctor, a psychiatrist and he is attracted to her and has sex with her is it rape? If she started it does it change things?
Suppose a 60-year-old minister entices an 18-year-old with the taunt of you’d be blessing the man of God, or your body is your ministry. Manipulation. Unethical. Is that rape?
If they offer her a drink with a little something in it, then have sex with her is that rape? She would not have been willing without the drink.
What and where are the lines? What and who should be punished, criminally?
Wow. Good question. We at home look at the news and try to figure out what rape is outside of the obvious description. Let's take one at a time.
1. Two underaged teens having sex is not rape when consensual. Just stupid and risky behavior.
2. The underaged girl there turns 16 or therabout when he turns 18. They have had sex before as underaged teens. Turning 18 makes him a legal adult ans she is still legally a child. The definition is that a child does not have the maturity to decide if she wants sex or not, therefore legally becomes 'rape'. However, looking at the circumstances, there is hardly a difference in years. I think the 18 year old should be busted as an adult for inappropriate behavior with a minor, but not rape, nor a sex crime. The girl should also be busted as a juvenile for inappropriate behavior. But no rape and no sex crime. They are only two years apart for crying out loud.
3. If a person gets the other person drunk with the intent to have sex, it depends on the person he/she is getting drunk. If a man asks a girl to have sex, she says no, then he buys her a bunch of drinks as "friends" let say, she gets drunk, loosens up, then he has sex with her when in her normal frame of mind she would not have done this, this to me is like the date rape drug. I say he could be charged with rape, though this is too hard to prove. The lady got drunk of her own free will and no one can really tell if she would have changed her mind otherwise. I say no, no rape, because the woman put herself in that position. However, if the woman is passed out drunk and can't even say no in her drunk state, that is rape.
4. Having sex with a mentally challenged person could be rape depending on the relationship with that person. If the other person really likes or loves that person, it is not rape. A one night stand may be rape. Most sexual assaults on the mentally challenged are in institutions. Those are all rape.
5. Standards are needed on sexual behavior in professions, like physicians, psychiatry (especially), or MINISTERS. If there is sex going on during the professional relationship, that is possible rape of a fragile person. If the professional relationship is over, the patient can see the professional in a personal relationship. That is not rape. If a physician, a psychiatrist, psychologist, or minister or priest have sex during the professional relationship, it is rape. Period. It should be punished by law.
In My Humble Opinion Of Course.
In these days we have too many "sex offenders" that are listed as such because they were 18 or 19 having sex with a 16 or 17 year old girl, though. These should not be sex crimes. The law should use more common sense. Hope this helps. I don't know anyone in these situations, however.
Whatever other reason could there be for such a discussion, if NOT for group therapy?
All these "hypothetical" scenarios are incredibly troubling. What possible good can come from just discussing "nebulous intellectual concepts" (if these are NOT things people have in their lives to evaluate and/or resolve)?
The person who started this thread wondered (out loud, at least "loud" enough that I could read it) about how related criminal laws are made. I answered that question and I don't believe ANYONE even acknowledged that post.
Is this just some mental exercise completely divorced from anyone's real life experiences?
Y'all ought to take a deep breath, stop and reflect on whatever the heck you think you're doing with this topic.
What good could possibly come from trying to prove someone else -- and their idea of what does or does not constitute rape -- wrong?
I wish there was an emoticon for shrugging one's shoulders and/or scratching one's head in bewilderment.
Kathy I guess where I am confused on the issue within a marriage is this
Which are we talking about
A woman who has sex with her husband voluntarily with no physical coercion and then decides to Cry "rape" to get a divorce settlement or get him out of the house or control of the assets
Or a woman who says not to sex and the husband physically forces himself onto her and she submits because he won't take no for an answer
or Physical violence where the husband forces the woman into sex.
One is a definite NOT RAPE
Two would require a lot of further research as to the exact situation and
Whatever other reason could there be for such a discussion, if NOT for group therapy?
All these "hypothetical" scenarios are incredibly troubling. What possible good can come from just discussing "nebulous intellectual concepts" (if these are NOT things people have in their lives to evaluate and/or resolve)?
The person who started this thread wondered (out loud, at least "loud" enough that I could read it) about how related criminal laws are made. I answered that question and I don't believe ANYONE even acknowledged that post.
Is this just some mental exercise completely divorced from anyone's real life experiences?
Y'all ought to take a deep breath, stop and reflect on whatever the heck you think you're doing with this topic.
What good could possibly come from trying to prove someone else -- and their idea of what does or does not constitute rape -- wrong?
I wish there was an emoticon for shrugging one's shoulders and/or scratching one's head in bewilderment.
Before I answer Templelady I wanted to first address your posts. I did read everything you read and was blinded to my personal challenges here and did not take the time to let you know I read them.
As to the purpose of this thread I cannot answer for Dot or anyone else but for me my participation has brought me:
Misunderstanding that I still need to address.
Head explosion to discover women actually marry men with no intention of ENJOYING the privilege of sexual relationship with their husbands (him with her the same) when that is part of the marriage relationship EVEN in the bible.
Disappointment that men seem to get me in regards to a woman using withheld sex as a weapon and the women don't for the greater part.
Disappointment that more contributors don't seem to appreciate the severity of a married woman screwing with her husbands head and then crying rape when the fire she chose to play in burned her. And the incredible damage that does to discredit rapes of women who did not invite it in any fashion.
Personal risks now taken on by my free will choice to put them in print just so I could validate I had a right to push this subject.
After a fitful sleep I now get to enjoy or regret the personal views of people I have considered friends (on line yes) for years and the concern that the set I have now grown will shortly demand that I leave you folks permanently.
There might be other things Rocky but that is a few that come to mind now.
excie, I need to address templelady next because I owe her an answer and perhaps in this reply it will help you with why I feel I may have set myself up for being asked to leave you all here.
Kathy I guess where I am confused on the issue within a marriage is this
Which are we talking about
A woman who has sex with her husband voluntarily with no physical coercion and then decides to Cry "rape" to get a divorce settlement or get him out of the house or control of the assets
Or a woman who says not to sex and the husband physically forces himself onto her and she submits because he won't take no for an answer
or Physical violence where the husband forces the woman into sex.
One is a definite NOT RAPE
Two would require a lot of further research as to the exact situation and
three is RAPE
does that clarify it???
templelady I appreciate you providing this breakdown because I took it as your honest intent to understand my intent.
Physical violence where the husband forces the woman into sex is rape unless she likes rough sex and asked for it in that fashion.
A woman that submits to physical force because he won't take no for an answer is a gray area due to if she taunted him into becoming aroused and then slammed him down with refusal. She invited that plain and simple and holds some liability even though that view seems to be held by me almost exclusively which troubles my head and heart.
A woman who has sex voluntarily with no coercion and then cries rape is a woman I would like to have 5 minutes alone with.
Now to an option you did not provide but one that perhaps will explain me better. With this new information of people marrying each other with no intent of taking care of each others sexual needs it complicates my brain cells because that seems to be inviting trouble from the start. And before I am given a dozen examples of a couple in their in their 80's who can not perform due to age and not lack of doing so if they could or a marriage where one member is disabled and cannot provide that pleasure I want to say even more deeper in words that I do not agree that people should marry with no intention of sexual relations when it is a normal and healthy function and at some point (there are exceptions to this, some mentioned above, some not but here is an et al to cover my butt should this post be copied and pasted in only this small section) to repeat since I made that so lengthy I do not agree people should marry with no intentions of sexual relations for one reason (I have others but one is sufficient) because it places both the male and female in a position to look elsewhere since it is not being provided by the one who should be willing to provide it.
I feel this arrangement could encourage the abuse of rape being cried and it damages the real victims of sexual abuse. If that does not sit well with anyone reading then my suggestion is to consider why you would think a wife and husband should be allowed to remain in a marriage if they know they are giving each other blue balls etc.
what do you mean cath ? why would anyone ever want you to leave ?
Knowing you and I have been raped in more ways than one it stabs me in the heart to think that a woman can use rape to her advantage which I believe provides a means of discrediting you and I and raping us over and over again.
A few IM'd me the same sentiment last night in the midst of all this and I wish I had taken this advice then also.
But in my enraged heart and mind I believed I was trying to get a point across of the danger of some of the things I was reading here and how those views will continue to rape the ones already raped.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
18
51
24
20
Popular Days
Feb 4
56
Feb 3
47
Feb 7
17
Feb 8
14
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 18 posts
ChattyKathy 51 posts
Dot Matrix 24 posts
potato 20 posts
Popular Days
Feb 4 2007
56 posts
Feb 3 2007
47 posts
Feb 7 2007
17 posts
Feb 8 2007
14 posts
Ductape
Going back to the original question as to when is it rape, if a woman is married to "Satan" and she has to ask, then get professional help now! A man that will beat or force a woman doesn't have any self control and rape is horrible, death is worse. Get out and get help if the question has to be asked.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
Chatty K, I don't think anyone in this thread said she went into marriage with the intent to withold sex from her husband.
Don't you think after years of neglect and/or abuse, some husbands might get pretty doggone unappealing?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ductape
Oh and I think pedophiles and rapists should be given a choice.
Their choice would be where to get cut
, their manhood or their throat, choose wisely grasshopper! 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
I think here, the question does need to be asked and discussed. Kathy, you know I think the world of you, but this whole due benevelonce thing makes me want to puke my guts out. TWI used it to shame and guilt women into sex. They used it to teach men they had a right to force himself on his wife (afterall, once married your body is not your own).
I would think, if a marriage is good, neither "due benevelonce" or "your body is not your own" would ever be something that needed to be discussed. The sexual relationship (barring physical ailment) would be good. When 'due benevelonce' is not occuring, it is a symptom of a marital problem - whatever that problem is, needs to be fixed THEN the due benevelonce will be fixed too. It doesn't work the other way around. You can fake it - you can go through the motions, but you no longer having lovemaking. All you have is one, or maybe two, people getting their rocks off. Nothing wrong with that, if that is what the two people want, but I would think within the context of a marriage, people would want more than that - at least most of the time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
potato
I'll say it again... he can get a divorce. he does have a choice about staying. if a woman is withholding sex out of spite, a whole lot more is going on and if the dude is all that, wtf is he sticking around for?
I'm getting confused about what you're talking about exactly, because now it sounds like the wife is rebuffing an advance, and if he backs off thats not rape and she's a liar. before it sounded like you were saying he got sick of not getting laid and had sex with his wife. the former, not rape and a woman calling rape is a liar. the latter, rape no matter what her behavior. if he wants sex, why is he married to a woman who won't have it with him?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Linda, this has gotten way more complicated than I ever imagined it would so I will try and make sense of this part.
I was using the fact a woman withholding sex all the time, not just when she should be for good reasons that I know exist, but when she never ever gave her husband relations and the man in time approached her wanting to have that from his wife. In those times I would agree that he should still not force himself on her but I am also saying if she then uses that as a cry for rape when she should have either left him or flat out told him before they got married she never intended to have sex with him she is using a horrible situation that happens to women for other reasons and giving cause to make all rapes questionable. She is not helping the women that were pulled into the bushes, given drugs to knock them off balance so they couldn't defend themselves, etc a more difficult time.
If you marry someone according to every understanding I have had you are agreeing to a relationship. If you do not want to ever have sex then state it up front. And that alone makes no sense to me, but I guess folks marry with no intentions of having marital relations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Yes Abi, yes you are right it was shoved down our throats. And gawd forbid if I didn't mean to appear I was going that place with it. And agreed also that something could go wrong afterwards, yes that is also true. I just had no idea my thoughts put to words would ever be so misunderstood. I have had to speak of something just to make this mess make sense that will possibly cost me dearly. Too late now. I have to live with the consequences. And still with all my personal risks I still can't seem to make people understand me.
I love you Abi, gawd knows I had planned to be with you and Sushi on that sweet day of yours because of my love for you both. I don't want to hurt you in any way.
I know what you are talking about also, all too well do I understand.
I just find it insane that women would willingly marry a man then never allow him to be intimate with her from the start. And then think she has the right to use rape to gain revenge against him. It just makes my head want to explode.
Be it right or wrong, it just makes me crazy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
You might have an answer now based on my posts to Linda and Abi. Possibly anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
Wow. Good question. We at home look at the news and try to figure out what rape is outside of the obvious description. Let's take one at a time.
1. Two underaged teens having sex is not rape when consensual. Just stupid and risky behavior.
2. The underaged girl there turns 16 or therabout when he turns 18. They have had sex before as underaged teens. Turning 18 makes him a legal adult ans she is still legally a child. The definition is that a child does not have the maturity to decide if she wants sex or not, therefore legally becomes 'rape'. However, looking at the circumstances, there is hardly a difference in years. I think the 18 year old should be busted as an adult for inappropriate behavior with a minor, but not rape, nor a sex crime. The girl should also be busted as a juvenile for inappropriate behavior. But no rape and no sex crime. They are only two years apart for crying out loud.
3. If a person gets the other person drunk with the intent to have sex, it depends on the person he/she is getting drunk. If a man asks a girl to have sex, she says no, then he buys her a bunch of drinks as "friends" let say, she gets drunk, loosens up, then he has sex with her when in her normal frame of mind she would not have done this, this to me is like the date rape drug. I say he could be charged with rape, though this is too hard to prove. The lady got drunk of her own free will and no one can really tell if she would have changed her mind otherwise. I say no, no rape, because the woman put herself in that position. However, if the woman is passed out drunk and can't even say no in her drunk state, that is rape.
4. Having sex with a mentally challenged person could be rape depending on the relationship with that person. If the other person really likes or loves that person, it is not rape. A one night stand may be rape. Most sexual assaults on the mentally challenged are in institutions. Those are all rape.
5. Standards are needed on sexual behavior in professions, like physicians, psychiatry (especially), or MINISTERS. If there is sex going on during the professional relationship, that is possible rape of a fragile person. If the professional relationship is over, the patient can see the professional in a personal relationship. That is not rape. If a physician, a psychiatrist, psychologist, or minister or priest have sex during the professional relationship, it is rape. Period. It should be punished by law.
In My Humble Opinion Of Course.
In these days we have too many "sex offenders" that are listed as such because they were 18 or 19 having sex with a 16 or 17 year old girl, though. These should not be sex crimes. The law should use more common sense. Hope this helps. I don't know anyone in these situations, however.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Is this a group therapy session?
Whatever other reason could there be for such a discussion, if NOT for group therapy?
All these "hypothetical" scenarios are incredibly troubling. What possible good can come from just discussing "nebulous intellectual concepts" (if these are NOT things people have in their lives to evaluate and/or resolve)?
The person who started this thread wondered (out loud, at least "loud" enough that I could read it) about how related criminal laws are made. I answered that question and I don't believe ANYONE even acknowledged that post.
Is this just some mental exercise completely divorced from anyone's real life experiences?
Y'all ought to take a deep breath, stop and reflect on whatever the heck you think you're doing with this topic.
What good could possibly come from trying to prove someone else -- and their idea of what does or does not constitute rape -- wrong?
I wish there was an emoticon for shrugging one's shoulders and/or scratching one's head in bewilderment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
Kathy I guess where I am confused on the issue within a marriage is this
Which are we talking about
A woman who has sex with her husband voluntarily with no physical coercion and then decides to Cry "rape" to get a divorce settlement or get him out of the house or control of the assets
Or a woman who says not to sex and the husband physically forces himself onto her and she submits because he won't take no for an answer
or Physical violence where the husband forces the woman into sex.
One is a definite NOT RAPE
Two would require a lot of further research as to the exact situation and
three is RAPE
does that clarify it???
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Tap, Tap... is THIS thing ON?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
THe marvelous thing about GSC is that there is first ---something for just about everyone
and second no one is forced to participate in a thread they are not interested in
That said
if you find no use for this thread
don't read it
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
that's not really the point.
However, if one is not able or willing to examine their motives/intents/reason for posting, who am I to suggest otherwise?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Before I answer Templelady I wanted to first address your posts. I did read everything you read and was blinded to my personal challenges here and did not take the time to let you know I read them.
As to the purpose of this thread I cannot answer for Dot or anyone else but for me my participation has brought me:
Misunderstanding that I still need to address.
Head explosion to discover women actually marry men with no intention of ENJOYING the privilege of sexual relationship with their husbands (him with her the same) when that is part of the marriage relationship EVEN in the bible.
Disappointment that men seem to get me in regards to a woman using withheld sex as a weapon and the women don't for the greater part.
Disappointment that more contributors don't seem to appreciate the severity of a married woman screwing with her husbands head and then crying rape when the fire she chose to play in burned her. And the incredible damage that does to discredit rapes of women who did not invite it in any fashion.
Personal risks now taken on by my free will choice to put them in print just so I could validate I had a right to push this subject.
After a fitful sleep I now get to enjoy or regret the personal views of people I have considered friends (on line yes) for years and the concern that the set I have now grown will shortly demand that I leave you folks permanently.
There might be other things Rocky but that is a few that come to mind now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
what do you mean cath ? why would anyone ever want you to leave ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
excie, I need to address templelady next because I owe her an answer and perhaps in this reply it will help you with why I feel I may have set myself up for being asked to leave you all here.
templelady I appreciate you providing this breakdown because I took it as your honest intent to understand my intent.
Physical violence where the husband forces the woman into sex is rape unless she likes rough sex and asked for it in that fashion.
A woman that submits to physical force because he won't take no for an answer is a gray area due to if she taunted him into becoming aroused and then slammed him down with refusal. She invited that plain and simple and holds some liability even though that view seems to be held by me almost exclusively which troubles my head and heart.
A woman who has sex voluntarily with no coercion and then cries rape is a woman I would like to have 5 minutes alone with.
Now to an option you did not provide but one that perhaps will explain me better. With this new information of people marrying each other with no intent of taking care of each others sexual needs it complicates my brain cells because that seems to be inviting trouble from the start. And before I am given a dozen examples of a couple in their in their 80's who can not perform due to age and not lack of doing so if they could or a marriage where one member is disabled and cannot provide that pleasure I want to say even more deeper in words that I do not agree that people should marry with no intention of sexual relations when it is a normal and healthy function and at some point (there are exceptions to this, some mentioned above, some not but here is an et al to cover my butt should this post be copied and pasted in only this small section) to repeat since I made that so lengthy I do not agree people should marry with no intentions of sexual relations for one reason (I have others but one is sufficient) because it places both the male and female in a position to look elsewhere since it is not being provided by the one who should be willing to provide it.
I feel this arrangement could encourage the abuse of rape being cried and it damages the real victims of sexual abuse. If that does not sit well with anyone reading then my suggestion is to consider why you would think a wife and husband should be allowed to remain in a marriage if they know they are giving each other blue balls etc.
Edited by ChattyKathyLink to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Knowing you and I have been raped in more ways than one it stabs me in the heart to think that a woman can use rape to her advantage which I believe provides a means of discrediting you and I and raping us over and over again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
just let me say, you have not at all set yourself up to be asked to leave
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
I used purple because I thought it would add to my above post.
And excie that might be the simple heart of the issue for me and why I would not let this go.
And I love you for your understanding.
Edited by ChattyKathyLink to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
also, there are many strange, cruel, screwed up people in this world
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
And you and I have been in their beds.
Which is not to say others here have not faced the same demons.
(I simply cannot type)
Edited by ChattyKathyLink to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
(((((((((( take a break, maybe ))))))))
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
A few IM'd me the same sentiment last night in the midst of all this and I wish I had taken this advice then also.
But in my enraged heart and mind I believed I was trying to get a point across of the danger of some of the things I was reading here and how those views will continue to rape the ones already raped.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.