This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
News Articles
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
Story
Basically, it's a story about a woman in Munich who twice lured men back to her apartment for sex, and then held them hostage and refused to let them leave or stop having sex. The second man said he was is so much pain he couldn't walk.
I have seen like four different versions of this article, and no one uses the word rape. More than half the commentators think it's funny, that the men asked for it, that they should "stop whining" and that they'd like to meet that woman themselves.
Also, it seems that their go to instinct with this is to evaluate her for a psychiatric disorder, and not consider her a rapist.
Double standard, don't you think?
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
The "bro" mentality gives a free pass to women who rape men and little boys, but only if they are hot.
Post by
Adamsm
Story
Basically, it's a story about a woman in Munich who twice lured men back to her apartment for sex, and then held them hostage and refused to let them leave or stop having sex. The second man said he was is so much pain he couldn't walk.
I have seen like four different versions of this article, and no one uses the word rape. More than half the commentators think it's funny, that the men asked for it, that they should "stop whining" and that they'd like to meet that woman themselves.
Also, it seems that their go to instinct with this is to evaluate her for a psychiatric disorder, and not consider her a rapist.
Double standard, don't you think?
/sarcasm Because females totally can't rape males(I've heard that idiotic mentality from way too many people).
And if she really is a nympho, then the psychiatric consultation is a good idea; but she should be in a secure lock down facility till they figure out if she was sane or not when she did the crimes....well, if Munich has that consideration in their laws.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I'm not necessarily the expert on nymphomania, but I imagine that it doesn't equate that all nymphomaniacs are rapists, or vice versa. I know that it wouldn't be a defense in court for a man convicted of rape, and it shouldn't make a difference here.
If it were just overwhelming sex drive, she could have paid for it, arranged multiple partners, used whatever they have that's equivalent to Craig's list. Kidnapping and rape aren't explained away by nymphomania for a woman any more than they would be for a man.
Post by
MyTie
Former NFL players
sue the NFL
because they got concussions.he had no idea of the consequences the game could haveThis reminds me of that porn star that was totally shocked when she got HIV. She thought they were the safest people you could have sex with.
Common sense? Anybody?
Post by
ElhonnaDS
Common sense? Anybody?
Oxymoron, sadly :(
Post by
Adamsm
I'm not necessarily the expert on nymphomania, but I imagine that it doesn't equate that all nymphomaniacs are rapists, or vice versa. I know that it wouldn't be a defense in court for a man convicted of rape, and it shouldn't make a difference here.
If it were just overwhelming sex drive, she could have paid for it, arranged multiple partners, used whatever they have that's equivalent to Craig's list. Kidnapping and rape aren't explained away by nymphomania for a woman any more than they would be for a man.
I just meant figuring out if she was sane or not at the time of the crimes; normal people don't kidnap others after all, so having her undergoing a consultation is a good idea. She should still be jailed for the kidnapping and the rape charges if they could make it stick....but other then child abuse(IE woman taking advantage of 10-17 years old), I'm not even sure how many women have been successfully prosecuted for rape the world over.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
They probably won't even charge her. Not that they shouldn't, but the double standard is still really prevalent legally.
Post by
MyTie
Bobby Kotick's sith apprentice makes news.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
They probably won't even charge her. Not that they shouldn't, but the double standard is still really prevalent legally.
I know, but one can always hope that somehow, some way, justice will happen.
Post by
MyTie
Well, in porn star defense, aren't there supposed to be frequent HIV-checks among 'performers'? So, if someone slips through with HIV , it is most likely producer fault for not controlling enough.
No.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Lombax
Well, in porn star defense, aren't there supposed to be frequent HIV-checks among 'performers'? So, if someone slips through with HIV , it is most likely producer fault for not controlling enough.
No.
Why?
It's porn, if you have that high standards 90% of it wouldn't be made.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I probably shouldn't be googling this stuff at work, but I think that for professional production companies there are certain standards for how often their performers need to be tested. However, there are a number of months between when you get infected and when it will show up on a screening, so it's by no means a sure thing. Then you have to take into consideration that all you really need to make a porn is one or more reasonably attractive (or maybe not even) people and a camera- they don't need talent, or much of a set, or anything- so you probably have a lot of low budget stuff that doesn't have even those safeguards.
I have to agree with MyTie on this- if you are having unprotected sex with strangers, you should now you're increasing your risks.
Post by
MyTie
Why?
If you were going to enter a profession where you accepted several other people's illness bearing bodily fluids directly into your body, in a sexual manner, on a regular basis, would you do any research as to the risks involved? The tests administered? The fail rates of these tests? The detect-ability window of HIV, herpes, Hep, etc? The historical infection rate of pornographic stars?
Of course you would... and then when you finished your research, you'd respectfully decline, because you would know it is dangerous as hell. She didn't bother to assess the risks, but instead just took someone else's word. While I do feel that there should have been a more frank discussion with her about those risks, she has the bulk of the blame in my opinion.
Post by
Adamsm
It is the actors/actress job to get tested...but if a company 'allowed' an HIV positive person to be working in a bare back scene, then yes, the actress would actually have grounds to sue them for placing her in an unsafe work environment.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
It's like a firefighter suing the city because he didn't know he could get burned doing that job. They can take a lot of preventative measures, and supply you with some protection, but at the end of the day you make your money running into burning buildings, and the possible consequences should be obvious.
@Adams- there is about a 6 month window between when someone can contract HIV, and when it will show up on a test. In that time, they're still contagious. Even if the company tests regularly, there is a window of time when a carrier is dangerous but undetectable.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.