Correct. If a man is flashing you his gun in an alleyway, he is flashing you his gun in an alleyway. If he then asks you for money, you may surmise that he could be robbing you. On the other hand, he could be simply asking for money and showing you his piece for you to admire.
I understand you're no friend to logic, but you should be able to see the difference between an inference that is logically sound and one that is not.
Prostitution is illegal - where people get paid remuneration for sex. Trading incentives for sex is sometimes illegal, but not universally. Whats more important, you can't prove it, and most courts wouldn't even want to - too small of a fish to fry. Not to mention that cops have a hard enough time busting actual prostitutes - where cash trades hands for sex. Busting someone who gets blowjobs once a week for a rent reduction is so ridiculous its out of the realm of possibility.If she isn't you should be able to report it because its illegal to trade favors for sex, at least in most places on this planet.
On what side? Male for paying, or female for offering?He is paying her to have sex with him. Do you not see anything wrong with this ?
Last edited by Ashnazg; 2012-12-27 at 10:38 PM.
That's disgusting...why hasn't a fundraising thing been set up to help her? >.< When that woman got insulted on the bus she got thousands from online donators >.<
If you're really going to take the position that a man who is flashing you his gun in an alleyway is not robbing you, then you shouldn't argue. Precedent and human behavior matters a fucking lot. It is not logically invalid to assume that somebody is robbing you if they flash their gun at you in an alleyway due to precedent information.
It's not rape, but it's very close. Your brother could really use some moral guidance. Also, my heart goes out to the girl who's probably emotionally traumatized and feels she has no other options. Of course, she wasn't forced to agree to this deal (at least I hope not!) so it's not like she's COMPLETELY blameless, though I'd say that the majority (about 85%) of the blame lies with your brother.
I mean, really, that's really low.
I have a brother as well and he can't do this kind of shit as long as I live. He would stop me doing this kind of sick deals too. This might be a hypothetical but such situations exit in real life.
So where does your brother live. I would LOVE to pay this guy a visit.
See, I have no problem with prostitution if it was regulated. Of course, it's a touchy subject since I am strongly against coerced prostitution, which a vast majority of it happens to be. The argument could be made, however, that the exploitative nature of the majority of prostitution stems from the fact that it's illegal, therefore can't be regulated. I mean, you can't report a pimp to the BBB, HR department, or whatever.
Whoever agrees with the guy probably has never had sex before in his life or has never been in a difficult situation in his entire life. I can´t believe Luftmangle is honeslty saying that´s what the girl wants. She is 18!, lost her parents, has to take care of her brother and has no money. And you say she has a choice?
In what situations have you even been in your life, that you consider this being a choice? Do you really say it´s fine to abuse others whenever you get the opportunity to do so? I can assure you that we, people that discuss such scenarios in a forum, are the weakest dogs in this planet and yet you want to encourage the "dog eat dog" habits?
If you want to compare this to a guy than please don´t use the landlady bullshit. 90% of the 18 year old guys would brag about fucking for a living. Compare it to a landlord, compare it to a situation where you would rather die than letting somebody know what you have been forced to do.
You don't have any precedent information, yet you act like you do. Your biases and prejudices are not valid precedent information.
If you're no friend with logic you shouldn't argue. Wait, who am I kidding, the MMO-C community will be reduced to a very small amount of posters then.
What on earth are you talking about? Are you saying that we (as a society) should automatically subsidize everyone who loses their parents? If so, you may have a point, but you should really argue about it in a thread devoted to socialist governments.And you say she has a choice?
Otherwise, why is the landlord - a third party - automatically supposed to reduce his rent for her for NO REASON other than the fact that she lost her parents?
Let me know when you get back to me with an answer that doesn't violate the basic principles of free market economy.
I didn't say that is what she wants. I said she is an adult who made a conscious decision to have her rent reduced by having sex with her land lord.
If she had no money, how would she be living there in the first place?
The adult women is a prostitute and the land lord is a "john". Nothing more to this story.