This woman thinks all men support rape

[Mushet]

Damnit, she tapped into the hivemind......

[The Norwegian Blue]

I do like sticking to the truth and repeating it until people learn. It would be nice if TNB did learn to take other people's feelings into account, and also nice if she spent the time and effort on analyzing cause and effect carefully.

Unfortunately, I'm dead serious with that; at this point, after having debated TNB on this topic a couple times, concluding that she is failing to exercise empathy - failing to put herself in the shoes of either the accuser or recipient in a realistic false rape accusation scenario - seems parsimonious, if somewhat depressing. If I were dismissing her, I wouldn't even be actually addressing what she said or attempting to analyze it. If you want to see an example of someone being dismissive, please observe this post, in which TNB, faced with a detailed rebuttal and harsh criticism, reacts by saying she will "never take [you] remotely seriously again."

That, Ifreann, is dismissing someone: Ignoring the material substance of what they say while telling them you're not going to listen to what they say. Patronizing? Oh, I'll grant "patronizing," since I am quite confident that I am right and she is wrong; and my suggesting that her failure to learn from my repeated attempts at instructing her on matters which I believe her to be in error is a failing on her part could easily be considered patronizing. I don't particularly try to be patronizing, but unfortunately, I do tend to start talking down to people when they start being stubborn about their mistakes.

When the response finally comes, care to bet whether it will be rational, well thought out and supported by examples and facts, or it will be sarcastic and full of ad-hominems? If I had money to bet ...

...physician, heal thyself.

I already stated that I am done engaging TJ because his last response crossed the line. I put up with him repeatedly lying about my arguments, I put up with him flaming me, but there are things I will not put up with, and truly grotesque trivializing of my experiences is one of them. So there will not be any response to his nonsense from me.

But thank you so very much for substantively addressing my posts instead of just randomly jumping in to whine about how I'm sarcastic. That sure proved how I'm a big ol' ad-homineming meanie-pants, unlike you!

(Also..."finally"? I last posted earlier this afternoon. Is having a life outside one's computer so totally foreign to NSGers that "OMG, she hasn't posted here in like FIVE WHOLE HOURS" is a real complaint? Yeesh.)

[Andaluciae]

Regarding the "condoned" issue, I refer you to the first post that she made in this thread which I choose to object strenuously to:

The saddest part is that, fundamentally, her essential point is entirely true: the vast majority of men engage in some behavior that contributes, directly or indirectly, to a culture in which rape is routinely condoned.

"Routinely condoned." Routinely condoned. Hm, wonder why someone would consider committing suicide due to their name being ruined for doing something that is "routinely condoned." We don't exactly treat rape charges like speeding infractions here.

On the long list of things I "routinely condone", I can agree you TJ, rape is not, exactly, on that list. Of all the crimes out there, the various incarnations of rape are the only ones that really make it impossible for me to keep up a consistent series of liberal pretenses. Maybe its personal experience and being too close, or whatever, but all of the qualms I have about a lot of really nasty things seem to fall away on this one. I can't get further away from condoning rape, because if I were to, I'd probably wind up playing a vigilate game with a .300 WinMag in the bushes a few hundred from the shitheads house whenever it came over the police scanner.

And, maybe it's an observer bias, but I don't think I'm that extraordinary on that, either.

Edit: It should also say something that when I wrote that, I was only thinking about a male rapist.

[Wiztopia]

When the response finally comes, care to bet whether it will be rational, well thought out and supported by examples and facts, or it will be sarcastic and full of ad-hominems? If I had money to bet ...

...physician, heal thyself.

I already stated that I am done engaging TJ because his last response crossed the line. I put up with him repeatedly lying about my arguments, I put up with him flaming me, but there are things I will not put up with, and truly grotesque trivializing of my experiences is one of them. So there will not be any response to his nonsense from me.

But thank you so very much for substantively addressing my posts instead of just randomly jumping in to whine about how I'm sarcastic. That sure proved how I'm a big ol' ad-homineming meanie-pants, unlike you!

(Also..."finally"? I last posted earlier this afternoon. Is having a life outside one's computer so totally foreign to NSGers that "OMG, she hasn't posted here in like FIVE WHOLE HOURS" is a real complaint? Yeesh.)

That post he posted did pretty much say that even though you threw the word generally in.

[The Norwegian Blue]

...physician, heal thyself.

I already stated that I am done engaging TJ because his last response crossed the line. I put up with him repeatedly lying about my arguments, I put up with him flaming me, but there are things I will not put up with, and truly grotesque trivializing of my experiences is one of them. So there will not be any response to his nonsense from me.

But thank you so very much for substantively addressing my posts instead of just randomly jumping in to whine about how I'm sarcastic. That sure proved how I'm a big ol' ad-homineming meanie-pants, unlike you!

(Also..."finally"? I last posted earlier this afternoon. Is having a life outside one's computer so totally foreign to NSGers that "OMG, she hasn't posted here in like FIVE WHOLE HOURS" is a real complaint? Yeesh.)

That post he posted did pretty much say that even though you threw the word generally in.

The post who posted did pretty much say what? I don't know what you're trying to say.

[Tahar Joblis]

I already stated that I am done engaging TJ because his last response crossed the line. I put up with him repeatedly lying about my arguments, I put up with him flaming me, but there are things I will not put up with, and truly grotesque trivializing of my experiences is one of them. So there will not be any response to his nonsense from me.

Grotesque trivializing of experiences? Such as, perhaps, conveniently forgetting about how in our quite recent previous discussion on false rape accusations, I brought up that my former track coach shot himself a few years after his life was totally derailed by a false rape accusation? I would call that grotesque myself. I referred to it as sickening earlier in this thread, in fact, but I would be curious as to whether or not you can recognize such things from others' perspectives, and would like to invite you - again - to consider the process of attempting to put yourself in the shoes of the Other.

[Galloism]

Well, I would take this to be her saying that sort of thing about false accusations (please pay particular attention to the bolded parts):

I'm not disputing that being accused of a crime can lead some people to think you might be a criminal and treat you accordingly. I'm disputing that this happens with rape to anywhere near the degree that some seem to suggest, because I can't honestly think of any well-known alleged rapist whose life got "ruined," and I can think of quite a few whose lives are just fine. (And I'm disputing that it's a particularly bad thing if people treat alleged rapists like possible criminals, since the alternative would seem to be, "If someone tells you that a guy you know raped her, you should assume she is lying and never doubt his complete innocence." Me, I think the appropriate response is to assume she's probably but not certainly telling the truth - because that's what statistics support - then examine the evidence, and come to the best conclusion you can based on it...which means being accused of rape SHOULD generally ruin lives, because generally, being accused of rape means you're a fucking rapist.)

Here, we have TNB blithely dismissing that false accusations happen with any significant frequency. As is generally the case, she mixes some more reasonable-sounding statements in, but when you look at the whole of what she's said, it's clear she's endorsing a ; "generally, being accused of rape means you're a fucking rapist" clarifies that she not only believes an accusation is more likely to be true than not, but that this probability is high enough to assert it as a general case. That not being a rapist is the exception that really requires demonstration. That simply being accused of rape should ruin lives.

Of course, her standard of ruining a life relies on her familiarity with celebrities accused of rape, never minding, of course, that celebrities often get away with quite a lot, and also not seeming to notice that even the ones that she brought up had to react in very serious ways to rape allegations. (Polanski, of course, admitting guilt and fleeing the country; Kobe's PR team working overtime to get his reputation back on track.)

When someone says that being accused of rape should generally ruin lives, they're dismissing the sort of case that I brought up to TNB last fall and mentioned again in this thread, and of course totally ignoring the more disturbing cases in which the court concludes the alleged victim is actually lying. The stigma attached to being a rapist is strong enough that it's not actually all that uncommon to see men respond to a public accusation of rape with attempts at suicide when faced with the prospect of having to live with that stigma - guilty or innocent.

I've watched this exchange for some time now, debating whether I should comment.

I wonder if we should mentally consider other crimes the same as TNB would consider rape. Crimes like murder, assault, and oh... filing a false police report, or slander.

The reason I say this is that nearly every rape victim (with precious few exceptions) is accused by the defense of lying and fabrication about the situation. Now, if we apply the "being accused means you're guilty" standard, one would be forced to conclude that nearly 1 in 4 women (might be 1/6 or 1/7, but my point still stands) are out to ruin peoples' lives, slander them, and file false police reports in an attempt to lock them up just because they had remorse or some other nonsense.

I don't believe that, and I would question the morality (and sanity) of anyone who would. An accusation is a claim, and the start of a case. It is, by far, not a smoking gun. After the accusation is made, investigation begins, and that investigation is the first step in determining guilt or lack of guilt.

Now, if you personally posses evidence not able to be used in court or you have personal knowledge of prosecutorial misconduct or such that you can be reasonably certain he's guilty, it would make sense to personally overrule the position of the court.

If not... well, your position of "the odds are in favor of him being guilty, so I'm going to do my part to attempt to drive him to suicide, guilty or innocent" is... saddening.

By the way, Neo Art and TNB raped me when I was with them in Tijuana and I was tripping on bad acid, but they looked like my little pony dolls, and I didn't want to be laughed at in court, but they're totally guilty.

[Wiztopia]

That post he posted did pretty much say that even though you threw the word generally in.

The post who posted did pretty much say what? I don't know what you're trying to say.

The Norwegian Blue wrote:I'm not disputing that being accused of a crime can lead some people to think you might be a criminal and treat you accordingly. I'm disputing that this happens with rape to anywhere near the degree that some seem to suggest, because I can't honestly think of any well-known alleged rapist whose life got "ruined," and I can think of quite a few whose lives are just fine. (And I'm disputing that it's a particularly bad thing if people treat alleged rapists like possible criminals, since the alternative would seem to be, "If someone tells you that a guy you know raped her, you should assume she is lying and never doubt his complete innocence." Me, I think the appropriate response is to assume she's probably but not certainly telling the truth - because that's what statistics support - then examine the evidence, and come to the best conclusion you can based on it...which means being accused of rape SHOULD generally ruin lives, because generally, being accused of rape means you're a fucking rapist.)

He posted that.

[The Congregationists]

But thank you so very much for substantively addressing my posts instead of just randomly jumping in to whine about how I'm sarcastic. That sure proved how I'm a big ol' ad-homineming meanie-pants, unlike you!

(Also..."finally"? I last posted earlier this afternoon. Is having a life outside one's computer so totally foreign to NSGers that "OMG, she hasn't posted here in like FIVE WHOLE HOURS" is a real complaint? Yeesh.)

Like I was saying ...

[Siyyon]

The only logical explanation for her stance is penis envy.

Ugh! Leave Freud out of this.

I utterly disagree with her.

Having said that, I dislike most of the men I meet, but I've been told I have "...an alpha-male thing" by a friend and often find myself intolerable, so I think that can safely be chalked up to my own neuroses.

[The Norwegian Blue]

The post who posted did pretty much say what? I don't know what you're trying to say.

The Norwegian Blue wrote:I'm not disputing that being accused of a crime can lead some people to think you might be a criminal and treat you accordingly. I'm disputing that this happens with rape to anywhere near the degree that some seem to suggest, because I can't honestly think of any well-known alleged rapist whose life got "ruined," and I can think of quite a few whose lives are just fine. (And I'm disputing that it's a particularly bad thing if people treat alleged rapists like possible criminals, since the alternative would seem to be, "If someone tells you that a guy you know raped her, you should assume she is lying and never doubt his complete innocence." Me, I think the appropriate response is to assume she's probably but not certainly telling the truth - because that's what statistics support - then examine the evidence, and come to the best conclusion you can based on it...which means being accused of rape SHOULD generally ruin lives, because generally, being accused of rape means you're a fucking rapist.)

He posted that.

...okay, and what is your actual issue with that?

Again, it is unquestionably shitty when someone is falsely accused of a crime they didn't commit. Duh. It is, however, utterly false to claim that being accused of a crime you didn't commit "ruins lives" to anything approaching the degree to which BEING FUCKING RAPED ruins lives. Can it, in some cases, ruin lives? Of course. Is it a tragedy when it does? Again, of course. Is it abso-fucking-lutely insane to argue that, by default, we should apparently all assume that anyone who claims to be raped is lying, lest we ruin someone's life (because, of course, being raped and not being believed couldn't possibly ruin anyone's life - or at least not anyone who matters, i.e. someone with a penis)? Again, of course. I am disgusted with men who feel the desperate need to hijack the issue of rape - something which directly affects between 16 and 25% of women (and roughly 3% of men) - to complain about the issue of false reports of rape, something which unquestionably affects a far, far, far smaller number of people, and generally to a far, far, far lesser degree. This thread is about how rape is or is not supported, not about false rape accusations - and yet, like nearly every rape thread, certain guys have to MAKE it about that, and have the brain-breaking gall to argue that they are in no way trivializing rape while explicitly insisting that it is less important and worthy of discussion than an issue that affects far fewer people to a far lesser degree.

[The Norwegian Blue]

But thank you so very much for substantively addressing my posts instead of just randomly jumping in to whine about how I'm sarcastic. That sure proved how I'm a big ol' ad-homineming meanie-pants, unlike you!

(Also..."finally"? I last posted earlier this afternoon. Is having a life outside one's computer so totally foreign to NSGers that "OMG, she hasn't posted here in like FIVE WHOLE HOURS" is a real complaint? Yeesh.)

Like I was saying ...

...yes? I'm waiting for the bit where you do, in fact, say anything addressing any of my posts. I'm sure it'll be most exciting.

[Eboinland]

"He is anti-abortion."

how does that make me a "rape supporter"?
I'm just not OK with unborn babies being sucked out of the womb with a vacumn...

[The Congregationists]

The reason I say this is that nearly every rape victim (with precious few exceptions) is accused by the defense of lying and fabrication about the situation. Now, if we apply the "being accused means you're guilty" standard, one would be forced to conclude that nearly 1 in 4 women (might be 1/6 or 1/7, but my point still stands) are out to ruin peoples' lives, slander them, and file false police reports in an attempt to lock them up just because they had remorse or some other nonsense.

I think it would be outlandish in the extreme to assert that the majority, or even a statistically significant minority of rape accusations are fabricated. I also think it's rather beside the point, ultimately. IF 99% of all men accused of rape are, in fact guilty, then each belongs behind bars, to the last. The 1% who is not guilty does not belong behind bars. If 1% of all rape accusations are willfully fabricated, than some kind of penalty is warranted in each of these instances. Whether being falsely accused of rape is as bad as rape itself, I cannot attest to. But even allowing for the argument that it is not, that doesn't actually make it right or defensible either.

What I'm suggesting is that "the numbers game" obscures the deeper point, and strikes me as an attempt to establish some kind of moral heirarchy based on victimhood. This misses the point. Both rape, and falsely accusing someone of rape are evil actions. I'll leave the pissing contests to those who have an axe to grind.

[Eboinland]

FREUDIAN PENIS ENVY ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Eboinland]

Damnit, she tapped into the hivemind......

10 million points to you!

[Galloism]

The reason I say this is that nearly every rape victim (with precious few exceptions) is accused by the defense of lying and fabrication about the situation. Now, if we apply the "being accused means you're guilty" standard, one would be forced to conclude that nearly 1 in 4 women (might be 1/6 or 1/7, but my point still stands) are out to ruin peoples' lives, slander them, and file false police reports in an attempt to lock them up just because they had remorse or some other nonsense.

I think it would be outlandish in the extreme to assert that the majority, or even a statistically significant minority of rape accusations are fabricated. I also think it's rather beside the point, ultimately. IF 99% of all men accused of rape are, in fact guilty, then each belongs behind bars, to the last. The 1% who is not guilty does not belong behind bars. If 1% of all rape accusations are willfully fabricated, than some kind of penalty is warranted in each of these instances. Whether being falsely accused of rape is as bad as rape itself, I cannot attest to. But even allowing for the argument that it is not, that doesn't actually make it right or defensible either.

What I'm suggesting is that "the numbers game" obscures the deeper point, and strikes me as an attempt to establish some kind of moral heirarchy based on victimhood. This misses the point. Both rape, and falsely accusing someone of rape are evil actions. I'll leave the pissing contests to those who have an axe to grind.

I ponder how many are fabricated, a case of mistaken identity, or the result of other factors, whereby the person is factually innocent, versus those factually guilty.

Sadly, that's probably not a statistic we'll ever get.

[Eboinland]

Yeah, this chick is batshit insane.

you win.

[Geniasis]

This is holding your shit together? Being patronising and dismissive? "Poor little TNB just doesn't know how to empathise with men. I'll just make her out to be a total idiot and a callous bitch, over and over again, until she learns to take other people's feelings into account"

I do like sticking to the truth and repeating it until people learn. It would be nice if TNB did learn to take other people's feelings into account, and also nice if she spent the time and effort on analyzing cause and effect carefully.

Unfortunately, I'm dead serious with that; at this point, after having debated TNB on this topic a couple times, concluding that she is failing to exercise empathy - failing to put herself in the shoes of either the accuser or recipient in a realistic false rape accusation scenario - seems parsimonious, if somewhat depressing. If I were dismissing her, I wouldn't even be actually addressing what she said or attempting to analyze it. If you want to see an example of someone being dismissive, please observe this post, in which TNB, faced with a detailed rebuttal and harsh criticism, reacts by saying she will "never take [you] remotely seriously again."

That, Ifreann, is dismissing someone: Ignoring the material substance of what they say while telling them you're not going to listen to what they say. Patronizing? Oh, I'll grant "patronizing," since I am quite confident that I am right and she is wrong; and my suggesting that her failure to learn from my repeated attempts at instructing her on matters which I believe her to be in error is a failing on her part could easily be considered patronizing. I don't particularly try to be patronizing, but unfortunately, I do tend to start talking down to people when they start being stubborn about their mistakes.

Generally speaking, any sentence on the subject of rape that begins with "You're a woman, so you've probably never had to think about..." is going to be a profoundly stupid thing to say.

[The Norwegian Blue]

If not... well, your position of "the odds are in favor of him being guilty, so I'm going to do my part to attempt to drive him to suicide, guilty or innocent" is... saddening.

I'm not sure who the "your" is here. It's sure as hell not me, since I not only never said anything even vaguely resembling that, but I'd think you'd have interacted with me enough by now to recognize that "likes driving people to suicide" is not a description likely to apply to me. I don't see anyone else who's argued anything like that, either.

What I ACTUALLY said was that I tend to assume that people who claim to have been raped are probably not lying - because they're probably not - and that if I have evidence to suggest that someone is a rapist, I'm going to treat them like someone who might be a rapist. I'm pretty sure I never specified how I treat possible rapists, but a more logical (and accurate) conclusion than "I try to KILL THEM ALL!" might be "I try to AVOID BEING ALONE WITH THEM!" and "I try not to HANG OUT WITH THEM SOCIALLY!" Oh, the horror. I mean, not that I'm not awesome, but I don't think not getting to have dinner with me quite constitutes life-ruination.

[Eboinland]

Female chauvinism indeed. It's that dumb "All males are rapists driven by insatiable sex drives and everything is an act for more sex!" rhetoric, equivalent to the male "All females are mentally-inferior hysterical baby-cravers" rhetoric V_V

wait, so calling all women hysterical is bad?!?!?! OOPSIES!

[The Norwegian Blue]

I do like sticking to the truth and repeating it until people learn. It would be nice if TNB did learn to take other people's feelings into account, and also nice if she spent the time and effort on analyzing cause and effect carefully.

Unfortunately, I'm dead serious with that; at this point, after having debated TNB on this topic a couple times, concluding that she is failing to exercise empathy - failing to put herself in the shoes of either the accuser or recipient in a realistic false rape accusation scenario - seems parsimonious, if somewhat depressing. If I were dismissing her, I wouldn't even be actually addressing what she said or attempting to analyze it. If you want to see an example of someone being dismissive, please observe this post, in which TNB, faced with a detailed rebuttal and harsh criticism, reacts by saying she will "never take [you] remotely seriously again."

That, Ifreann, is dismissing someone: Ignoring the material substance of what they say while telling them you're not going to listen to what they say. Patronizing? Oh, I'll grant "patronizing," since I am quite confident that I am right and she is wrong; and my suggesting that her failure to learn from my repeated attempts at instructing her on matters which I believe her to be in error is a failing on her part could easily be considered patronizing. I don't particularly try to be patronizing, but unfortunately, I do tend to start talking down to people when they start being stubborn about their mistakes.

Generally speaking, any sentence on the subject of rape that begins with "You're a woman, so you've probably never had to think about..." is going to be a profoundly stupid thing to say.

I'm glad there exist other people who see what's deeply wrong with that statement. Sometimes NSG scares me.

[Galloism]

If not... well, your position of "the odds are in favor of him being guilty, so I'm going to do my part to attempt to drive him to suicide, guilty or innocent" is... saddening.

I'm not sure who the "your" is here. It's sure as hell not me, since I not only never said anything even vaguely resembling that, but I'd think you'd have interacted with me enough by now to recognize that "likes driving people to suicide" is not a description likely to apply to me. I don't see anyone else who's argued anything like that, either.

What I ACTUALLY said was that I tend to assume that people who claim to have been raped are probably not lying - because they're probably not - and that if I have evidence to suggest that someone is a rapist, I'm going to treat them like someone who might be a rapist. I'm pretty sure I never specified how I treat possible rapists, but a more logical (and accurate) conclusion than "I try to KILL THEM ALL!" might be "I try to AVOID BEING ALONE WITH THEM!" and "I try not to HANG OUT WITH THEM SOCIALLY!" Oh, the horror. I mean, not that I'm not awesome, but I don't think not getting to have dinner with me quite constitutes life-ruination.

Well that's what I get for assuming how you treat people you view as possible rapists. So, if basically all you do is avoid being alone with them, that's a reasonable precaution one supposes.

I guess I was confused by the acquitted previously suspected rapists "should have their lives ruined" comment. My apologies.

Also, that sentence was really hard to write.

In the future, I will avoid being with you and Neo Art alone, although I did like the my little pony outfits. The guy dressed as a green Darth Vader was weird, though.

[Jagalonia]

Hold on a sec...I think I got something for this....Where was it....Ahh yes...

Rape
noun, verb, raped, rap·ing.
–noun
1. the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
3. statutory rape.
4. an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.
5. Archaic . the act of seizing and carrying off by force.
–verb (used with object)
6. to force to have sexual intercourse.
7. to plunder (a place); despoil.
8. to seize, take, or carry off by force.
–verb (used without object)
9. to commit rape.

[Hydesland]

Again, it is unquestionably shitty when someone is falsely accused of a crime they didn't commit. Duh. It is, however, utterly false to claim that being accused of a crime you didn't commit "ruins lives" to anything approaching the degree to which BEING FUCKING RAPED ruins lives.

All of these things are variable, not constant. Sometimes a false rape accusation can be shrugged off (it helps if you're wealthy with powerful friends), other times it can isolate and separate you from your family, friends and your career, forever, and that is literally one of my biggest fears I can think of. It can ruin it even more if you're falsely sentenced. That a false accusation can and has led people to suicide or self harm means that I don't agree that the seriousness can never 'even approach' the seriousness of actual rape. Sometimes people are affected by things differently, some people emotionally react to things differently. To some mentally handicapped people even things we view as very innocuous can provoke in them a reaction of suicidal depression. You simply cannot generalise about these things and pretend that there is a universal hierarchy of harm, especially when the harm we're talking about is largely psychological. It always depends on the context and the person.

we should apparently all assume that anyone who claims to be raped is lying, lest we ruin someone's life (because, of course, being raped and not being believed couldn't possibly ruin anyone's life - or at least not anyone who matters, i.e. someone with a penis)?

What I believe is that if we have absolutely no information other than the fact one person accused another, you shouldn't assume anything.

certain guys have to MAKE it about that, and have the brain-breaking gall to argue that they are in no way trivializing rape while explicitly insisting that it is less important and worthy of discussion than an issue that affects far fewer people to a far lesser degree.

False rape accusations wasn't raised in an attempt to trivialise real rape, you can't go around suggesting that with such nonchalance, seriously. That is simply something I would find shockingly offensive if I were TJ. From what I read of the conversation, false rapes were raised only to demonstrate that the fact that peoples lives have been ruined due to the reaction of society of a mere allegation of rape (even when false) provides some evidence that society does indeed take rape seriously and does not regard the act as trivial or of little harm.