Suppose a woman is raped

Suppose a woman is raped.
It's an absolutely clear-cut case, zero ambiguity, he aggressed, she resisted the entire time, he used force to keep her bedded and yelled at her, etc.

There's hard video evidence for everything. The victim collected it without the perpetrator's consent.
She had a security camera in her room. When she was first attacked, she signalled the camera to begin recording.
Her intention was to prove justified self defense in case she should kill him in the process of resisting, but because her resistance was ineffective, the tape wound up becoming evidence against him instead.

Both parties are white. Not that it should matter, but I know it will to you fuckwits, hence why the detail is included.

Who do you side with? Prosecution or defense?
Note that there is a right answer.

Attached: 1591245959153.png (698x698, 216.32K)

>without the perpetrator's consent.
Don't need consent faggot

Lynch the "white" nigger

Good job spotting the first trap.
Waiting on someone to fall for the second one

I would be concerned that this wasn't some kind of roleplaying hitjob if she was able to remotely start a security camera but not escape.

Fair enough, the premise is flawed. But supposing we accept it at face value -- he *did* rape her, and, one way or another, it *is* perfectly clear, even if it takes more than what I've laid out to make it so -- then, who do you side with?

>It's an absolutely clear-cut case, zero ambiguity
This is the real trap

Since there has been some concern on this point, allow me to reformulate the scenario.
Suppose a woman is raped. Suppose that one way or another, it's objectively true that she was raped, and we somehow know this for whatever reason.
Whomst'd've do you side with?

>ambiguity
Is the reality of the situation. Stop shilling for wenches.

Sage.

Attached: Filthy Rich.png (635x472, 102.58K)

It's a hypothetical.
If there were no ambiguity, who would you side with.

OP here, dynamic-IP-hopping to bump my own thread. Reminder to that saging someone who works off a hotspot is pointless.

Bump

Is the man willing to marry the woman? If so, then i'm siding with the man

What if the woman isn't willing to marry the man?

How do I know it wasn't just a bdsm session she asked for, and then staged a camera in place to frame him for rape?

You don't, at least not as I framed the scenario initially. Which I concede as a flaw in the scenario. Hence why I reframed it.

Rapist should get the bullet, white people are superior because we practiced eugenics so it's retarded to allow rapists to walk free

who asked her?

fuck what she has to say

That's retarded user, women shouldn't marry rapists and pass on his genes

If most of the rest of the board shares this view, then thank you for helping me decide, I've made up my mind about this place.

Get he fuck off this board with this reddit shit, you stupid fucking cunt.

>thinking some edgy retards actually think what they say

I'd side with the victim, retard. Assuming in your hypothetical that it's 100% incontrovertible that he's guilty, why would I side with a rapist?

What important news is this shit attempting to slide?

If its objectively true that there is a perpetrator and a victim, them I'll side with the victim, no matter the gender, social status or whatever.
Unless its a nigger, muslim or jew.

>what if a martian landed in dc and told everyone you were a big bad naughty man?
Suppositional arguments that you will attempt to generalize to everything.

>Her intention was to prove justified self defense in case she should kill him in the process of resisting
So her intention was to kill him? Then i doubly support him.

>Her intention was to prove justified self defense in case she should kill him in the process of resisting
Her vagina can be rebuilt. Human lives are more important. She was wrong to resist in a way that had any chance of ending a human life. She should be forcibly reeducated until she understands that.

stfu weeaboo faggot. sage

Great minds think alike

>Her intention was to prove justified self defense in case she should kill him in the process of resisting,

So she anticipated getting raped and set up a camera beforehand?

Kek, is she Swedish?

Did she dress like a whore? In this scenario? But anyway I would be on the women's side, but not a 100%. I as I don't have all the facts, as far as I know she might have raped his boy with a cactus or something

Attached: powerful.png (375x600, 518.6K)

There was a reason for the hypothetical, and it wasn't that.
I was testing to see how many people here would say the rapist is based for keeping the white race alive and rape is only bad if it's a nonwhite man on a white woman because then they're diluting the white race instead, and the woman has no right to complain because she is a machine whose sole purpose is having sex and popping out babies and her body is public property and not her own and she should be thankful to him for helping her fulfill her purpose and protect the white race.
I'm surprised no one has brought up this perspective yet.

>If most of the rest of the board shares this view
You're a fucking collectivist? You're borg, who cares what you think.

Cringe.

Did I say that if most of the rest of the board shares that view then they're right?
I don't recall saying that.

Depends... Define "rape"...

It is possible that this was some kinky roleplay that they agreed to earlier is it not? Like with a safeword?

Also is the man her husband?

If he is not her husband then yes I side with her. He should be forced to marry her to attone for his sin. Fucking criminal.