It's an important story but your editorialized title once again hurts you and the message. Not that the BBC's title puke ("landmark move") is much better.
No that's your opinion. Editorialized means you changed the original title, here in an attempt to make your point about "the gays". You should be adapting your message to the audience. Was adding some clever stinger like "rainbow ruse" necessary? If you must add opinion you should be trying to piggy-back on top of the LGBT bill instead of telling us the things we value are wrong. Something like...
"It gets worse: Along with the LGBT bill Japan passes wide-ranging feminist re-write of rape laws"
Then put your bullet points about why it's bad in a comment. You could even end the comment with "Honestly I think the LGBT bill was a distraction. This is far worse for men."
Your tactic is instead to run around screaming LISTEN TO ME YOU FOOLS while slapping people and calling them idiots, simps, stormcucks, and allies of TERFs. One of the reasons people cannot take you seriously is that you don't even seem to be trying.
No, you can't say women are adopting male children to murder them. To address your other concern: you can't say gays only want to rape children for the same reason.
I don't really care about Imp being banned and I'm fine if you let him calm down for a couple days, but I still wanted to ask:
Why is that rule 16 a thing on this site? I'm pretty sure that near everyone here values free speech far more than not allowing a few schizos from making sweeping generalizations. If we were to pin a poll asking people about their opinion on removing it, would you honor the results?
Its 13 nationwide but the prefectures had it at 16-18. The change is to the national law, but it doesn't change much in practise because the prefectures themselves already had it at 16-18
I'm not, I'm probably more pessimistic than you. But I'm not disconnected from reality.
Any criminal punishment has to have intent on the part of the offender. If the woman is afraid and the guy knows it or should reasonable know, that is one thing. If not, no punishment can result from that.
Yeah, this will do wonders for a country already suffering from lack of interest in sex and marriage. Now Japanese men have to worry about false accusations that need zero proof for conviction, that will get those men back out there... right?
It's an important story but your editorialized title once again hurts you and the message. Not that the BBC's title puke ("landmark move") is much better.
No that's your opinion. Editorialized means you changed the original title, here in an attempt to make your point about "the gays". You should be adapting your message to the audience. Was adding some clever stinger like "rainbow ruse" necessary? If you must add opinion you should be trying to piggy-back on top of the LGBT bill instead of telling us the things we value are wrong. Something like...
"It gets worse: Along with the LGBT bill Japan passes wide-ranging feminist re-write of rape laws"
Then put your bullet points about why it's bad in a comment. You could even end the comment with "Honestly I think the LGBT bill was a distraction. This is far worse for men."
Your tactic is instead to run around screaming LISTEN TO ME YOU FOOLS while slapping people and calling them idiots, simps, stormcucks, and allies of TERFs. One of the reasons people cannot take you seriously is that you don't even seem to be trying.
but what about lesbians or ftm who want to date gay guys? 🤔
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Comment Removed for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
No, you can't say women are adopting male children to murder them. To address your other concern: you can't say gays only want to rape children for the same reason.
I don't really care about Imp being banned and I'm fine if you let him calm down for a couple days, but I still wanted to ask:
Why is that rule 16 a thing on this site? I'm pretty sure that near everyone here values free speech far more than not allowing a few schizos from making sweeping generalizations. If we were to pin a poll asking people about their opinion on removing it, would you honor the results?
but are lesbians pedos? 🤔
Imp hit hardest.
Its 13 nationwide but the prefectures had it at 16-18. The change is to the national law, but it doesn't change much in practise because the prefectures themselves already had it at 16-18
It's still dumb as it encourages underage slutting around with chads from school.
What of it? That still requires mens rea.
I'm not, I'm probably more pessimistic than you. But I'm not disconnected from reality.
Any criminal punishment has to have intent on the part of the offender. If the woman is afraid and the guy knows it or should reasonable know, that is one thing. If not, no punishment can result from that.
That's got nothing to do with 'yes means yes'.
I know you think grooming gangs and rape should be legalized.
Would someone Google what's the most common female sexual fantasy in Japan?
Yeah, this will do wonders for a country already suffering from lack of interest in sex and marriage. Now Japanese men have to worry about false accusations that need zero proof for conviction, that will get those men back out there... right?
Post Reported for: Rule 13 - Reposts
Post Approved: Similar stories covering the same issue is not a repost.