With the greatest respect Castiel we've heard this time and time again haven't we. Was only a bit of fun she looked 16! Oh it was only a quick squeeze - no harm done! Maybe it's time readjust again and consider what one person may find fun could actually be damaging to someone else.
Poll: Student jailed for 9 months for "prank"
- Thread starter Mynight
- Start date
No, it didn't but the question was to someone else as I was interested in his response.
Which question sorry?
Having a penis inserted into my mouth without consent would be an assault in my opinion.
Having a drunken man teabag me was a a load of blokes pratting about.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 9,707
- Location
- North
Ok this thread just got officially weird, why does oldcoals have a penis in his mouth again? 
Assault or sexual assault just to be clear?
Personal opinion, it may not always be sexual.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
The problem with your argument is it relies on a logical fallacy (or should that be phallusy?)
That being 'The penis can be used for sexual purposes, the defendant used his penis in the incident, therefore he did it for sexual reasons'.
Sexual assault.
I haven't used that fallacy but feel free to pretend that is what I am saying when I am not.
Did he put his penis in her mouth?
As for the rest, it depends on the context, if it was a bunch of drunken teens at a party and one of them flapping his willy about at a girls face and from what we've been told thus far that is what happened, it's not "its just a quick squeeze' when in fact it was a grope (and I've had women, not many mind you, grope me on occasion) or underage sex...from what we can gather it was drunken, stupid teenagers doing what drunken stupid teenagers do. Stupid drunken things.
It's not right, it should be punished, but I'm questioning whether ruining this kids life is appropriate in the circumstances or whether rehabilitation would be better served in another way.
Ok, so let's take it further which was the point of the question.
If he placed it just on your lips would it still be unwanted? Or would that be ok?
Following from that if he put just to the side of your lips would that be unwanted by you? Or would that be ok?
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 9,707
- Location
- North
Being put on a sex offenders list does seem harsh and ultimately pointless given he isn't likely to re-offend or be a danger to the public, which the sex offenders list should/is about.
I've already answered you on this above.
It was a arguably unconscious person - surely unconscious people meet the definition of "vulnerable".
Last edited:
Then it seems to be redundant as the question is asking him to consider what is a considerably different thing.
Placing it upon me, I would not consider that to be an assault or sexual assault.
Placing it in my mouth, yes.
I don't think anyone is saying it is ok by any stretch of the imagination, the question lies in whether the sentence was appropriate given certain criteria. ( I say certain criteria, as the actual case specifics seem to be rather sketchy at the moment)
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
You keep defending the term 'sexual assault' on the sole basis the penis is a sexual organ don't you?
So either you have changed your mind and no longer think it was a 'sexual assault' or you think sexual motivation need play no part in a sexual assault thus rendering the 'sexual' part of the description redundant (leaving us with the more accurate term 'assault' which seems to be elmarko's position).