She became ill and a member of staff asked Mr Dougal, who was working as a security guard, to walk her home. She told the court she could remember little else apart from lying on the corridor floor and briefly emerging from unconsciousness to be aware "that something was happening". That is truly revolting. Woman gets sick, security guard comes to her aid, woman becomes unconscious, woman later finds out security guard had sex with her while she was unconscious. If that's not rape, I don't know what is. But I'm sure Viking isn't denying that it is rape, only that the woman is not to blame. The problem with this whole discussion is that some are confusing the responsibility a woman has to keep herself safe, with whether the woman is to blame for the rapist's actions. In other words, would you give a rapist a lighter sentence because his victim was drunk or flirtatious? In the end, as this story, demonstrates, that's all that matters.

Castro, Originally posted by Castro: To begin that process of restructuring, the couple must have (satisfactory) answers to the following: That's why I'm dismissing this whole exercise as pointless. We don't know the couple, we don't know the whole situation, which seems like a classic Catch-22. I wouldn't blithely give advice to a married couple I know, much less strangers. It just doesn't seem like a reasonable topic of conversation, except it hopefully made us all think about family and marriage and whatnot. More interesting would be finding out what Nur adviced and why. At least Nur is here to speak for himself and defend his position. On another topic: Callypso, I've no reference in the Quraan to show aknowledgment. This does not mean it doesn't exist, but merely that I'm unaware of it. Though I do know of this hadeeth: The hadith does seem to acknowledge that children owe their mothers much, although I have always understood it to refer to the sacrifices of pregnancy and childrearing, and not the fact that mom resisted the gardener while she was ovulating . But in either case, I was think of something more concrete than that. Men have their four wives and concubines, and women are exhorted to dress modestly so as to make it easier for the men resist sin. Women have none of these, but they are still burdened with this biological urge which is never explicitly recognized. Instead, the prevailing myth is that only men need these measures because women just want one good man thank you very much. To acknowledge this, I believe, women must have either an easier path to heaven or tougher road to hell. I don't know. I'm no Islamic scholar, but I do acknowledge the existence of the disparity you spoke of. May be someone else could enlighten both of us. Maybe.

just get weaned Alright, no glassful of milk for me, no not even in my Cheerios, but hell will freeze over before I give up my cadays in my shaah. It's all I hold sacred.

^LOL. Only if all the girls are modestly dressed.

^^What if she poisons them? No, I still think my idea is better.

Castro, Atheer Callypso, it is not an accident that a man would have upwards of 50,000,000 sperm in one stroke of the hand (pun intended). These huge numbers are certainly not just a motorcade or an entourage for the one lucky junior farax that fertilizes the egg. They have many different roles, not the least of which is checking for and destroying any remnants of another man's little soldiers. Sperm count, motility and speed have all been shown to increase when the male suspects his mate to be cheating. Indicating that biologically women are "meant" to entertain multiple partners as well. Yet no divine acknowledgement to make their lives less burdensome.

Nur, some civility and good choice of words says a lot about a debator. On that we can wholeheartedly agree.

But a woman who flirts with strangers, drinks excessively, dresses provocatively and walks dark alleys by herself late at night is putting herself in danger. But the majority of rapes occur at home, and most women know the rapist (yes, even in the West most victims are not drunk sl*ts in dark alleys). You are simply re-iterating a myth that most rapes are in dark alleys. They are not. We are not arguing that a woman should not exercise caution, just that in most cases a woman is in a situation where she feels safe.

Castro, Women, however, are far more evolved than men and are very discreet about their matters of the heart (and other body parts). That's because they have no sense of entitlement. If a woman wants another man, she knows it's wrong to cheat on her husband so she makes an effort to resist, or she doesn't but is fully aware of the consequences. Men, however, have been conditioned to think that it's their right to have as many women as they can, and their wives are being immature or selfish for protesting. So many of them are sloppy, not trying very hard to keep the infidelity a secret (the-lipstick-on-the-collar syndrome), or running to the nearest wadaad so he can reassure them that it's okay to break their wives' hearts because satisfying themselves is more important. If that wadaad doesn't follow the script, they go to the next one ad infinitum until they find one that knows what he is doing. Boys will be boys. Nur, I'd tell Faarax to kill his wife and make it look like an accident. This way he gets oodles of sympathy and retains the respect of his social circle. Not to mention any monies wifey had. Then as a widower marry the other Xalimo. Rinse. Repeat.

Baashi, I did not mean to imply that you condone rape, I was just trying to demonstrate that it takes a "special" kind of man to rape a woman, so your scenario falls flat for your average joe. Most people enjoy sex and want it to be enjoyable for their partner as well. Very few men can maintain an erection when their partner is screaming, crying or otherwise indicating great unwillingness when the erection was induced to begin with by their partner being willing.

Ngonge, Now, I return to my view that rape is something most of us are capable of doing and if put in the right environment, many of us would easily succumb to it. I wouldn't. Anymore than I would break into someone's home during civil unrest. Because it's wrong. Perhaps some people do follow laws out of fear of punishment, but some of us have finely tuned moral engines that stop us from succumbing to most temptations. Unfortunately. Baashi, Even if she is so inviting so provacative and showers u with kisses going all over u half-naked in the privacy of her room making u all worked up and aroused ...but last minute when going gets lovely and Castro reaches the point of no return she makes a u-turn and says NO PLZ STOP! In this situation, r u claiming that u would not be a human? Okay, let's carry on the scenario. She's crying and struggling, maybe lashing out and kicking, so you slap her just to stun her, and you maybe have to punch her in the belly to stop the struggling, and then you remove the rest of her clothing, she stirs a little, maybe feebly pulls her legs together. Hmmm, maybe you have to hit her a couple of times more, now she's crying even harder and ARE YOU STILL AROUSED?

Viking, Callypso, This is a ridiculous example, take a moment and you'll see why. You are comparing times of war when there is no govt, no police or army to protect the people and no justice system to see to your rights. During times like these, people are killed, maimed, robbed, their properties taken by force etc. Plus, Serbs were raping Muslims because an ethnic cleansing was taking place. Muslims were also the ones massacred and buried in mass graves. These crimes were committed against them because they were simply Muslims! In this anarchic instance, it is soldiers and not your average sickos that were the rapists. No, Viking. You missed the point. It has nothing to do with laws or government or even average sickos. The subtext from a few posters is that rapists are men who could not control their sexual urges at the sight of a scantily-clad female. My point is that rape is a method to humiliate a woman or to exercise control. Those Serbs are essentially doing the same thing when they massacre those Muslims and when they raped their women. Both were elements of violence against people they wanted to destroy. Line up the men and shoot them, rape the women. If rape was about being brought to a fever pitch by women dressing provocatively, the women of Bosnia would not be targetted because the soldiers had nothing to excite them. They would just have been shot dead like the men. And that image you drew of a Western victim as a slutty drunk in a dark alley by herself...I wonder, could a hijab covered sober girl walk in a dark alley safely? Aren't you confounding factors here? You mentioned Asian maids getting raped and/or molested by their Saudi employers. You obviously understand that the reason these employers are doing so is because they know they can get away with it. The vulnerability here comes from the lack of legal protection, not the scarcity of clothing. A man fearing reprisals will not rape a naked woman dancing in front of him. But a man confident that society will turn the other way will target any woman, no matter how she comports herself.

JB, Humans are intelligent animals, so they often give nature the finger and do as they wish. Right now I'm wearing a wool sweater. What animal kills another and covers itself with the hide of the dead animal? Honey is the secretion of bees intended by them to feed their baby bees, whatever they are called. I just had some honey drizzled on my bagel. How weird is that? Seen in that light, milk consumption is not so strange, after all.

Castro, Black markets can be combatted with law enforcement... Who'll watch the watchers? Castro, you are too good a man to realize that 1) You are limited in your actions by your compassion, but greedy SOB have no such compunctions. They will always win, from creating false documents that show non-existent children so they can get more milk, to bribing law enforcement, to any number of clever tricks to acquire wealth/status. 2)You are presuming you will live forever as the compassionate king, when in reality your 11 sons are waiting impatiently for you to die so they can make the economy "efficient" (ie, line their pockets). Maybe you are thinking that you will select the best of them as heir?

^That was pretty exquisite, Rosie. For those who still give some credence to the idea that the woman is partly to blame, answer the question I asked Seeker: Serbian soldiers gang-raped Muslim women who presumably were far more conservatively dressed than their own women. How much blame would you ascribe to the women? I mean only some of the Muslim women got raped, so the ones that did must have been doing something wrong that the others avoided, right?

Tom Clancy's best-selling novel, "The Sum of All Fears" is about Palestinian terrorists. But when the movie, starring Ben Affleck, came out, the bad guys became European neo-Nazis. How do you interpret this, then? I think the studio is just being cautious. It's the reaction of certain Muslims they fear, and with some justification. Some Muslims might take offense just from reading the title.

Femme, Yeah, that's true. I can't count the number of fat people I know who say the fault is their "slow metabolism" while pigging out on junk. But perhaps it's a food addiction. Or low self-esteem. Or lack of impulse control. Castro, I remember our neighbor back in Xamar was this miskiin man who used to talk to himself and gesture wildly. Kids used to knock on his door and run away, or provoke him or otherwise torment him. Adults would just laugh it off. I was mostly afraid of him so thankfully I wasn't one of the tormentors. Truth is, I'm still afraid of "disturbed" individuals, a gut reaction I have a hard time rationalizing.

I think we should start off with basic definitions... Socialism: You have two cows; your neighbor has none so you give him one. Communism: You have two cows, the government takes both and gives you a little milk. Fascism: You have two cows, the government takes both and sells you a little milk. Dictatorship: You have two cows, the government takes both and shoots you. [Totalitarianism:[/b] You have two cows, the government takes both and then denies they ever existed. Milk is banned. Capitalism: You have two cows, you sell one and buy a bull; you breed the cows, raise a herd, sell them, retire and keep two cows Bureaucracy: You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. After that it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms accounting for the missing cows.

Ever heard of the "gini coefficient"? It measures inequality in wealth or income, and the US has been leading industrialized nations for years as one of the countries with the highest gini coefficients (ie the most inequal). Ah but I wouldn't want to live anywhere else!

There's nothing new about about killing babies who happen to have birth defects. They used to be exposed, left out to die, abandoned or otherwise eliminated. Abortion is just the same act at an earlier age. The objection I have is that doctors who advice someone to do so are just frighteningly arrogant. As for the murders, come on. Are you suggesting there's some sort of trend? They are sensational news stories, not a common theme in Western society. Finally, the "polyamorists". What's the objection? Isn't polygamy essentially the same thing?

Nur, Rahima told you to concede that you made a mistake? Then that's a bit heavy-handed of her, IMO. Just a question in response to this: Are we ready to sit in a hut in Kurtunwaarrey to suggest the ban of the practice there without being accused of being gaalo? Would fear of such an accusation hold you back from condemning what you saw as wrong or immoral? Let's say Kurtunwaarey residents regularly sacrifice animals at the graves of Sheikhs; would you hesitate to frown on such practice for fear of being labelled a gaal?

Originally posted by Castro: Instead, both FGM and abortion should be left as an option during the critical years (say between 14-22) when you are fairly certain the girl has gone bad or that fetus (now this gangsta punk) is not worth keeping. I think we could all agree on the above, no? Yes, let's kill or maim all teenagers. Bloody beasts eat too much and contribute too little anyway.

To bolster Castro's argument that what the woman is wearing is irrelevant, I recall a study was done in which rapists were asked what their victims were wearing. The majority of them could not remember, which weakens the argument that the rapists target a woman because of her clothing or behavior. Instead, what most rapists are looking for is vulnerability, both physical and psychological. Seeker, do you think the gang-rapes of Kosovar women by Serbian men could have been due to how provocatively the women were dressed? How about in Bosnia or Rwanda? Castro also pointed out an interesting point about the possible evolutionary advantage of males raping women they otherwise could not have sex with consensually. There was actually a book written by a couple of evolutionary psychologists that argues that point. One line of evidence for this is the attitudes of people towards the rape victim depending on her age: it's seen as more of a tragedy if the woman is of reproductive age rather than too old. There is also the suggestion that a young woman is more traumatized following rape than a postmenopausal woman. There are many holes in the theory: most rapists are married, and presumably able to pass on their genes legitimately, and a male victim of rape by another male is probably the most traumatized individual imaginable contrary to what the theory would predict, but it's interesting nonetheless.

LOL. I thought this was going to be an article from The Onion.

Not particularly surprising. That a third of respondents believe a woman is to blame for being raped only means that two thirds do not believe she's responsible, even if she was drunk or acting flirtatious. That's probably an improvement from earlier eras, and certainly better than the figure would be for Somalis. Sometimes these alarmist polls are not so alarming... The number of recorded rapes of women in 2004/5 was 12,867 - up 4% on the year before Here in the US, rape and other violent crimes has been on the downswing lately. Only 6% of reported rapes result in a conviction. This is the most depressing statistic but it probably has more to do with practicalities of evidence requirements than any deep-seated discrimination.