Woman Catches Man Pleasuring Himself on Paris Metro

[Dr.3D]

Rape is about control

That's why the little dog humps people's legs.

[specsaregood]

Ya that's why I'm not really judging this guy. Just like I don't judge people who have low libidos, I mean, maybe they got struck in the nuts by lightning when they were a kid or something, why should I judge them.

That's our dannno.

[PaulConventionWV]

It's not a feminist trope. Do you think men in prison rape other men just because they're horny? No..they use it to degrade and control.

What does that have to do with real life? Men will do that to other men because it's a power play, but the same doesn't hold true for men and women. There's no power play between men and women because we already know who has the power.

[Spikender]

There's no power play between men and women because we already know who has the power.

Yeah.

Nintendo.

[Carlybee]

What does that have to do with real life? Men will do that to other men because it's a power play, but the same doesn't hold true for men and women. There's no power play between men and women because we already know who has the power.

Oh good grief. Do you honestly not know there are men out there who like to degrade women even though obviously they are generally physically stronger..it goes far beyond that. Surely you are not that naive. Some men get turned on by raping someone. So yes it's about urges too but if the thought of overpowering and taking someone by force is what turns them on then to me that is about power and control and it doesn't have jack squat to do with feminism but with reality.

[Dr.3D]

Wouldn't libertarians be asking, what damage the man caused to anybody? Who did he hurt?

[Ronin Truth]

Wouldn't libertarians be asking, what damage the man caused to anybody? Who did he hurt?

Yes, we CAN say that. But I won't.

We can also say that in public, it is much more preferable behavior to be polite, discreet, courteous, inoffensive, and civilized.

Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do (pdf)

[Dr.3D]

Yes, we CAN say that. But I won't.

We can also say that in public, it is much more preferable behavior to be polite, discreet, courteous, inoffensive, and civilized.

Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do (pdf)

And who has the job of defining what is polite, discreet, courteous, inoffensive and civilized?

Out of billions of people, some are going to find most anything offensive.

[Ronin Truth]

And who has the job of defining what is polite, discreet, courteous, inoffensive and civilized?

I would say each of us.

Out of billions of people, some are going to find most anything offensive.

And I figure that there is probably a general universal consensus about what is and what is not acceptable public behavior.

For examples, what if she had caught him taking a dump in the center aisle of the Paris Metro, or sodomizing a child, etc.?

//

[Dr.3D]

//

Those things cause damage.

[Ronin Truth]

Those things cause damage.

Agreed, and they are also outrages of common human decency.

[Dr.3D]

Agreed, and they are also outrages of common human decency.

So what does that have to do with what that fellow was doing?

[Ronin Truth]

So what does that have to do with what that fellow was doing?

Would you be OK with your young daughter or your grandmother to be subjected to witnessing that? I wouldn't.

Common human decency public outrage.

Which is probably the bottom line motivation for the thread.

If you want to masturbate on the train, go right ahead. If I were you though, I would not be surprised at very unpleasant consequences.

[Dr.3D]

Would you be OK with your young daughter or your grandmother to be subjected to witnessing that? I wouldn't.

Common human decency public outrage.

Which is probably the bottom line motivation for the thread.

So people can't really explain why they find some things decent and other things indecent. Perhaps it's all about what they were told as children and now they believe a certain way and can't explain why they think that way.

Yes, in our society, that is considered indecent. I was just questioning why that is the case.

[Carlybee]

Wouldn't libertarians be asking, what damage the man caused to anybody? Who did he hurt?

Well...if I was standing there he would be invading my personal space and well being...ergo a property rights issue. Assuming I had nowhere to go as in if the train was packed and moving. My personal perimeter is my personal property. That being said the guy is obviously mentally ill, so it wouldn't do much good to go off on him. If it was just some ahole trying to get his jollies or shock me, I'd probably slap him upside the head for annoying me.

[Dr.3D]

Well...if I was standing there he would be invading my personal space and well being...ergo a property rights issue. Assuming I had nowhere to go as in if the train was packed and moving. My personal perimeter is my personal property. That being said the guy is obviously mentally ill, so it wouldn't do much good to go off on him. If it was just some ahole trying to get his jollies or shock me, I'd probably slap him upside the head for annoying me.

Well, as long as he didn't "go off" on you, there still wouldn't be any damages.

[PaulConventionWV]

Oh good grief. Do you honestly not know there are men out there who like to degrade women even though obviously they are generally physically stronger..it goes far beyond that. Surely you are not that naive. Some men get turned on by raping someone. So yes it's about urges too but if the thought of overpowering and taking someone by force is what turns them on then to me that is about power and control and it doesn't have jack squat to do with feminism but with reality.

Ask a rapist why he rapes and you won't get any of this pseudo-intellectual bull$#@! about how they just want to control women and keep them down. If a man wants sex that bad and has the means to get it, then why attribute more than just the desire for sex? Who cares whether he likes control? It was the desire for sex that ultimately drove him to the act, not this stupid cliche about control and subjugation. The man may enjoy the aspect of control, but by no means does that mean it's all about that one aspect. Ultimately, he wanted sex and had the means to get it. That's all there is to it. The main motivator is never simply the desire to control another person. It's the desire for sex, period.

Here's an article with quotes from interviews of some rapists and their motives:

https://emmatheemo.wordpress.com/201...-ask-a-rapist/

Notice the line about control never really comes up. The only reason we're even talking about it that way is because of the feminist propaganda that says rape is what men use to subjugate women as some sort of status preservation for the male sex. Why would we even discuss rape in those terms if it weren't for the feminists? There's no reason to even go that route unless you think there's some kind of widespread societal conspiracy of men trying to oppress women with rape. It doesn't make any sense to bring that up as a motive when no rapist is bringing it up. All they knew was that they wanted sex or maybe they were angry at some specific woman, but it was never about controlling women in general as a sort of punishment for being too strong/independent of a woman.

[PaulConventionWV]

Well...if I was standing there he would be invading my personal space and well being...ergo a property rights issue. Assuming I had nowhere to go as in if the train was packed and moving. My personal perimeter is my personal property. That being said the guy is obviously mentally ill, so it wouldn't do much good to go off on him. If it was just some ahole trying to get his jollies or shock me, I'd probably slap him upside the head for annoying me.

You clearly don't understand property rights. Who determines how far out your "personal space" extends? It's generally acceptable for people to be packed into a metro bus like sardines, but some guy does something you don't like and suddenly you own a 5 foot radius around your person?

It's not a property rights issue at all. As others have pointed out, it's about common human decency. If a guy does this, then he must also be willing to accept the consequences of being exposed as a pervert, not to mention running the risk of getting himself knocked out. From a libertarian perspective, though, I suspect the most appropriate response to this type of behavior would be to give him plenty of room and if he makes any aggressive moves, there will probably be a lot of people just waiting for the chance to knock him out. You may think some pre-emptive action is in order, but I honestly don't see anything inherently problematic for the NAP in this situation. Either way, I don't really care. Somebody who does that is probably bound to get knocked out at some point, and while the guy who does it is guilty of aggression, who's to say it wasn't worth it just for the satisfaction of giving that idiot what was coming to him?

[Carlybee]

You clearly don't understand property rights. Who determines how far out your "personal space" extends? It's generally acceptable for people to be packed into a metro bus like sardines, but some guy does something you don't like and suddenly you own a 5 foot radius around your person?

It's not a property rights issue at all. As others have pointed out, it's about common human decency. If a guy does this, then he must also be willing to accept the consequences of being exposed as a pervert, not to mention running the risk of getting himself knocked out. From a libertarian perspective, though, I suspect the most appropriate response to this type of behavior would be to give him plenty of room and if he makes any aggressive moves, there will probably be a lot of people just waiting for the chance to knock him out. You may think some pre-emptive action is in order, but I honestly don't see anything inherently problematic for the NAP in this situation. Either way, I don't really care. Somebody who does that is probably bound to get knocked out at some point, and while the guy who does it is guilty of aggression, who's to say it wasn't worth it just for the satisfaction of giving that idiot what was coming to him?

Dude, I determine what constitutes my personal space and whomever chooses to cross that perimeter does so at their own risk. End of story.

[CPUd]

[Suzanimal]

Well...if I was standing there he would be invading my personal space and well being...ergo a property rights issue. Assuming I had nowhere to go as in if the train was packed and moving. My personal perimeter is my personal property. That being said the guy is obviously mentally ill, so it wouldn't do much good to go off on him. If it was just some ahole trying to get his jollies or shock me, I'd probably slap him upside the head for annoying me.

He would probably enjoy it. I would laugh and point - they pull up their pants real quick when you do that.

[Carlybee]

Ask a rapist why he rapes and you won't get any of this pseudo-intellectual bull$#@! about how they just want to control women and keep them down. If a man wants sex that bad and has the means to get it, then why attribute more than just the desire for sex? Who cares whether he likes control? It was the desire for sex that ultimately drove him to the act, not this stupid cliche about control and subjugation. The man may enjoy the aspect of control, but by no means does that mean it's all about that one aspect. Ultimately, he wanted sex and had the means to get it. That's all there is to it. The main motivator is never simply the desire to control another person. It's the desire for sex, period.

Here's an article with quotes from interviews of some rapists and their motives:

https://emmatheemo.wordpress.com/201...-ask-a-rapist/

Notice the line about control never really comes up. The only reason we're even talking about it that way is because of the feminist propaganda that says rape is what men use to subjugate women as some sort of status preservation for the male sex. Why would we even discuss rape in those terms if it weren't for the feminists? There's no reason to even go that route unless you think there's some kind of widespread societal conspiracy of men trying to oppress women with rape. It doesn't make any sense to bring that up as a motive when no rapist is bringing it up. All they knew was that they wanted sex or maybe they were angry at some specific woman, but it was never about controlling women in general as a sort of punishment for being too strong/independent of a woman.

You're delusional. No one said there was a widespread societal conspiracy of men trying to oppress women with rape. There are texts upon texts in every psychology journal around regarding power and control as a motivator for rape. These journals weren't written by feminists, they were written by psychology experts. Do you think a rapist sits back and analyzes his own motives? Of course not. He is driven by premeditation, just like murderers, pedophiles, etc. and no one said it was about controlling someone for being too strong or independent. Generally they choose women who are easy marks. However, since you appear to think you are an expert on the subject I doubt any of that is going to sink in, however you might want to question why you seem to be defending rape as a simple sexual urge.
Many rapists plan it out in advance and stalk their victims. That is not a momentary lapse in judgment. Date rape may be a different issue...ie, when someone says no and he doesn't stop. That's a more cloudy issue as it gets into he said she said about consent...ie, refer to OP.

[Ronin Truth]

So people can't really explain why they find some things decent and other things indecent. Perhaps it's all about what they were told as children and now they believe a certain way and can't explain why they think that way.

Yes, in our society, that is considered indecent. I was just questioning why that is the case.

I know common human "indecency", when I see it.

[Carlybee]

Well, as long as he didn't "go off" on you, there still wouldn't be any damages.

Never said I would sue him.

[Carlybee]

He would probably enjoy it. I would laugh and point - they pull up their pants real quick when you do that.

Well..depends. If he's truly a mental case he might be in some alternate reality where nothing anyone says or does even registers.

[Dr.3D]

I know common human "indecency", when I see it.

Of course you do. Your parents taught you.

In some other societies, what is taught as decent vs. indecent is different.
Take the jungles of New Guinna. Many of the tribes there don't wear clothing, and they think nothing of it.
To them it's not indecent to be seen without clothing.

It's not about instinct, but rather what we have been taught.

[Carlybee]

Of course you do. Your parents taught you.

In some other societies, what is taught as decent vs. indecent is different.
Take the jungles of New Guinna. Many of the tribes there don't wear clothing, and they think nothing of it.
To them it's not indecent to be seen without clothing.

It's not about instinct, but rather what we have been taught.

They also used to eat people

[Dr.3D]

They also used to eat people

See, obviously learned behavior. That wasn't considered indecent either.
Society makes up it's own rules for what is considered indecent. Sometimes it's a good idea to question social norms.

[Carlybee]

See, obviously learned behavior. That wasn't considered indecent either.
Society makes up it's own rules for what is considered indecent. Sometimes it's a good idea to question social norms.

I'm pretty sure the people getting eaten thought it was indecent.

But not everything is learned. Do serial killers start out killing animals for pleasure because they saw Wylie Coyote get an anvil dropped on his head or because something got skewed in their brain
or their serotonin levels are totally out of whack?

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

buzzfeed is one of the single most race/gender-baiting sites on the web