Illinois First State to Pass 'No Means No' Law

FoxNews ^ | August 19, 2003 | By Jeff Goldblatt

[Blood of Tyrants]

CHICAGO

[Blood of Tyrants]

In Illinois you can now be charged with rape if your date says "No" AFTER you have begun actual consentual intercourse.

Unbelieveable. The feminazis win this one and next they will push to have a law passed that it is rape if the woman decides some time after coitus that she really didn't want to have sex. Mark my words.

[coloradan]

Does one have until the morning after to change one's mind about having given consent?

[OXENinFLA]

I'm so glad I move out of that state.

[Blood of Tyrants]

That is next on the feminazis agenda.

[Agnes Heep]

The feminazis win this one and next they will push to have a law passed that it is rape if the woman decides some time after coitus that she really didn't want to have sex. Mark my words.

I have a feeling you're correct. Incidentally, if the woman is on top and the man says "no," how long does she have to comply?

[coloradan]

This law jeopardizes a joke:

What's the difference between a lady and a diplomat? If a lady says no she means maybe and if she says maybe she means yes, and if she says yes she's no lady. If a diplomat says yes he means maybe and if is says maybe he means no, and if he says no he's no diplomat.

[Adder]

As long as you haven't cleaned yourself up and still have the evidence, by these standards you can cry "Rape" whenever you want.
This is an awful law pushed for a non-existent problem whose consequences will ruin men's lives. There are just enough women out there who will choose to use it that way to make it a horrible statute.
The only people it will "empower" are the unscrupulous.
When are we gonna wake up????

[HurkinMcGurkin]

The clarified clause won't have a direct bearing on the Kobe Bryant trial, which will take place in Colorado.

The Illinois law will have no impact on the Kobe Bryant case," Wiehl said.

Really?? No kidding??

[Blood of Tyrants]

Since the woman has no power, then she can't rape a man. (Directly from the feminazi handbook.)

[xzins]

The "DNA Collection Law"

Wait for the moment of no return and say, "no."

Your word against his, but you have the advantage of his DNA to prove your case.

[coloradan]

I suppose the only thing men can do is tape their sex acts, just in case one of them later decides to file such charges. It's sort of like concealed carry - the false-rape-claim women don't know who's taping.

[xrp]

Headline 15 years from now found in Illinois newspapers:

No new babies born in IL in past 15 years

Men cite fear of litigation as reason for avoiding sexual relations in Illinois.

[Vaduz]

First law that should be passed YES means "YES".

[Servant of the Nine]

I suppose the only thing men can do is tape their sex acts, just in case one of them later decides to file such charges. It's sort of like concealed carry - the false-rape-claim women don't know who's taping.

I think you are right.
I have known women who would literally chant "no, no, no" despite being on top and in total control of the engagement.

So9

[WKB]

This law needs a 10 second rule.
There is a point when a man CAN”T stop even when he wants to.

[Sacajaweau]

You make it sound like women are running to the cops crying rape when in fact, the opposite is true. Few rapes are reported.

[steve-b]

Next: Arkansas First State To Pass "Is Means Is" Law.

[Wright is right!]

"I have known women who would literally chant "no, no, no" despite being on top and in total control of the engagement."

Go ya one bettah. Used to date a girl whose big thrill was being forced to do various normal acts. It's a variation on the handcuffing fetish, I s'pose. It was that way every single time. She'd have a list of several no-no's, but being forced to do them really tripped her trigger.

And there are a lot of women like her.

Michael

[Mr. Jeeves]

The heterosexual sex act is an act of submission for the female - by default: her body is being penetrated. You can talk about equality all day, but every slang term related to sexual intercourse recognizes this truth. It doesn't mean men hate women or that women don't enjoy sex, it's just a reality of our physical natures that women are psycho-biologically wired to respond to.

But feminists absolutely cannot deal with this kind of reality, so they are concocting all of these bizarre and vile laws to try to make it go away.

[Adder]

The rationale for the law is what? How absurd is it to initiate coitus and then stop in the midst of it and claim rape if, in the mind of the "helpless" victim, stopping was not quick enough. That is rape? Thats nailing down the definition?
This is a male bashing law plain and simple. It is also empowering to no one.
I would be happy to be proven wrong. But the way the wording reads, women are not being protected, men are being put at risk.