should all sexual encounters be videotaped?

[galileoreloaded]

Sex video clears men accused of rape

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/09/5553262/sex-video-clears-men-accused-of.html#storylink=cpyhttp://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/09/5553262/sex-video-clears-men-accused-of.html

" The hookup got hot and wild, and one of the two men whipped out his cellphone to shoot a video of the room-to-room romp with the woman they'd just met that night.

The sex video may have been the only thing that saved the two from prison.

The woman accused them of rape. The video showed otherwise, police and prosecutors said. What happened that night led to the vicious beating of one of the men two days later."

[dusty trails]

1. Hmmmm

You really don't want to see me naked.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. You mean like in Steubenville?

Yeah. I'm all for documenting rape and making it more difficult for victim blaming defenses to be effective.

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. That is the other side of the coin.

Those perps would have gotten off without the video evidence.

[opiate69]

6. Quick quiz: Identify the victim(s) in the OP....

[loli phabay]

8. bah i aalready video all my encounters, then upload them. its part of the fun

As you know the world is full of all types.

[In_The_Wind]

3. Heh! No one is going to videotape me.

Not gonna happen.

[Major Nikon]

7. How about if I throw in a RC cola and a moonpie?

[MrSlayer]

4. Eric Williams, an ex-Dallas Cowboys player did this.

He would insist that any woman that was going to have sex with him be videotaped giving consent ahead of time and then during the acts because he was tired of false claims against him.

It sucks that people have to do this but you have to do what you have to do.

[loli phabay]

9. well its a good idea if you want to relive the moment or use them to audition for new partners

[LanternWaste]

10. If yo''re intimate with someone you know and someone you trust, probably not

If you're intimate with someone you know and someone you trust, probably not (unless you get your kicks that way).

Otherwise, I'd imagine that sex with strangers often leads to unintended consequences on many different planes.

However, I do realize that the patience and time it takes to know someone enough to trust them in all things may run counter to the agenda of far too many idiots.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. "I do realize that the patience and time it takes to know someone enough to trust them in all things

may run counter to the agenda of far too many idiots."



...

[opiate69]

12. Hehe.. nailed as usual

[nomorenomore08]

13. Meh... I think you were a little harsh on the guy.

Speaking for myself, I have nothing against casual sex per se - certainly it can be a lot of fun - but monogamy (temporary or otherwise) has its good points as well.

[Warren DeMontague]

14. Of course it does. Im in total agreement.

Speaking for myself, having had both casual sex and sex in a committed, trusting relationship, there's no contest. And of course I think people should enter ALL sexual relationships- either short or long term- with honesty and clear communication.

However, with regards to this group and it's assorted "fans" on DU, none of us just fell off the turnip truck, here.

When certain people, given their posting history, come in making blanket generalizations about "the agenda" of "too many idiots", it's not terribly difficult to read between the lines.

[nomorenomore08]

15. Understood. And I'm sure you've noticed that I bounce pretty freely between this group and HoF.

So I myself have no particular "agenda" one way or the other. And I'm not inclined to automatically assume that others do.

I also know from your posts that you're a "monogamous" fellow nowadays yourself. But I was directing my previous post more generally, not personally.

[lumberjack_jeff]

16. The poster to whom Warren was replying has a well-known and explicit agenda.

The poster's fundamental point is that it's prudent to protect ones self only if you're too lazy (and sex crazed) to get to know the person well enough "to trust them in all things".

I wonder if he'd apply the same standard to protecting ones self from other kinds of sexual victimization?

Would he have answered the question posed to HoF "Is it appropriate to bring pepper spray on a date?" with the answer he posted?

The list of people I "trust in all things" is short, and gender isn't a factor in earning a place on that list.

[nomorenomore08]

17. Okay. I didn't read so much into it myself, but you may be right.

nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. I've been monogamous for 30 years next month so... no argument with your post upthread.

I'm just saying that it's prudent to assume good faith until the person in question gives really compelling reasons to assume something else.

[nomorenomore08]

19. Agreed. I just thought the "church lady" comparison was a little over the top, meant humorously

or not. And I don't even necessarily think that permanent monogamy is inherently superior to other kinds of sexual relationship - like most anything else, it depends on the person.

[Warren DeMontague]

21. I suspect that poster can survive my mild church lady rebuke.

[nomorenomore08]

23. I'm sure he can. LW is generally a smart, reasonable guy, one condescending remark notwithstanding.

nt

[Warren DeMontague]

24. I can't really speak to other comments made elsewhere on the board, but I believe you.

I've just noticed a pattern of some people playing what I call "Ding Dong DU Ditch", after a fashion, with this group. Taking a little shot in a thread and then running off to tee-hee about it, elsewhere.

And yeah, I know people do that with certain other groups as well.

[nomorenomore08]

25. Like many other things, I just chalk it up to the nature of the Internets.

[Warren DeMontague]

20. I wasn't referring to you.

And yes, I certainly am happily married and monogamous & that's exactly how I want it. Still, I'm not inclined to pass judgment on how others orchestrate their affairs.

For some people casual sex, lust, mutually-enjoyable-but-emotionally-commitment-lite sex is what they want and/or like, and AFAIAC, there's nothing inherently "wrong" with that.

I was taking note of the potshot upthread about "idiots" and "agendas", of which the unspoken subtext, to me, was fairly obvious. Apparent. Not end-of-the-world hair on fire stuff, but certainly deserving of an eyeroll.

Hell, any good artist ought to be glad their work is being understood, and appreciated, by its intended audience. No?

[nomorenomore08]

22. I know. And I can see what you mean RE: the potentially offensive "subtext" there.

Rather condescending, on his part, if nothing else.