Infantry Discussion Thread part 11: Gallas Razor edition.

[Purpelia]

What if your country controlled its entirely out of control libido?

But that is the opposite of fun. Better to go all Purpelia on it and just do it.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

I was going to suggest rape is dating in Afghanistan but I P(o)K(e)M(on) distracted me so much I didn't think of it.

Rapists are often killed in Afghanistan by the families, the death of rapists is considered as good for overcoming dishonour as marriage.
Also rape is viewed as evil in Pashtunwali, ask any expert on the subject.

If it was viewed as "not a big deal" why would it be one of two crimes (the other being adultery) where the culprit cannot be offered sanctuary?

The fact the accusations are often not believed does not change the fact that if people believed it happens they condemn it harshly (which suggests the crime itself is seen as wrong, it's just accusations are believed to be false).

[Purpelia]

I was going to suggest rape is dating in Afghanistan but I P(o)K(e)M(on) distracted me so much I didn't think of it.

Rapists are often killed in Afghanistan by the families, the death of rapists is considered as good for overcoming dishonour as marriage.
Also rape is viewed as evil in Pashtunwali, ask any expert on the subject.

If it was viewed as "not a big deal" why would it be one of two crimes (the other being adultery) where the culprit cannot be offered sanctuary?

The fact the accusations are often not believed does not change the fact that if people believed it happens they condemn it harshly (which suggests the crime itself is seen as wrong, it's just accusations are believed to be false).

It is indicative that for such a harsh crime the conditions for conviction are deliberately set so that its extremely difficult to actually convict someone.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Rapists are often killed in Afghanistan by the families, the death of rapists is considered as good for overcoming dishonour as marriage.
Also rape is viewed as evil in Pashtunwali, ask any expert on the subject.

If it was viewed as "not a big deal" why would it be one of two crimes (the other being adultery) where the culprit cannot be offered sanctuary?

The fact the accusations are often not believed does not change the fact that if people believed it happens they condemn it harshly (which suggests the crime itself is seen as wrong, it's just accusations are believed to be false).

It is indicative that for such a harsh crime the conditions for conviction are deliberately set so that its extremely difficult to actually convict someone.[/quote
But if it was viewed as minor why would those convicted of it be sentenced to death?

In Islam the more severe crimes are always harder to convict (adultery, theft, hirabah).
Rape is hirabah according to many scholars anyway,
Hirabah does not require 4 witnesses, only 2 witnesses or physical evidence.

[Gallia-]

If you can't enforce laws because of <insert reason here> then it's not much of a law, or a deterrent to doing the crime anyway, because the chance of actually being killed (or rather, punished) for it is extremely low. And so rape is relatively common in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Indian Kashmir. And rapists can even be rewarded for it even if they are caught. This applies doubly so for shotacons in Afghan infantry and police platoons, which are often kept as barracks bunnies in sexual slavery, but we've had this conversation before.

It's probably entirely possible for a Muslim society to enforce anti-rape laws, but it would require a form of Islam which is very different from any IRL school of thought, because most of the IRL ones tend to require obnoxious things like four male witnesses, and the general cultural climate is one that is very forgiving to rapists in general, despite lip service to the contrary. If it weren't so forgiving, it would be more like a Western society, where the mere accusation of rape (or any sexual crime), decades after the fact, can end a career and require very serious investigations by very serious people. Or it can also be weaponized as a means of silencing of political opponents.

Sex crimes are very serious in the Western world. The Muslim world has a much more "boys will be boys" view of the whole thing.

[Dayganistan]

which Muslim countries ban women from the infantry?
Which ones allow it?

Since this is your only question that has a cut and dry answer I'll go with this.

Afghanistan allows women in special forces (and not just as support personnel, they're door kickers too) but not regular infantry. I believe this is the case in Turkey as well. Syria has female infantry but they're a special case at the moment. The Kurds are known for having female fighters so they're kind of an example. You're not without precedent for allowing women in infantry or SOF as a Muslim nation.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

If you can't enforce laws because of <insert reason here> then it's not much of a law, or a deterrent to doing the crime anyway, because the chance of actually being killed (or rather, punished) for it is extremely low. And so rape is relatively common in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Indian Kashmir. And rapists can even be rewarded for it even if they are caught. This applies doubly so for shotacons in Afghan infantry and police platoons, which are often kept as barracks bunnies in sexual slavery, but we've had this conversation before.

It's probably entirely possible for a Muslim society to enforce anti-rape laws, but it would require a form of Islam which is very different from any IRL school of thought, because most of the IRL ones tend to require obnoxious things like four male witnesses, and the general cultural climate is one that is very forgiving to rapists in general, despite lip service to the contrary. If it weren't so forgiving, it would be more like a Western society, where the mere accusation of rape (or any sexual crime), decades after the fact, can end a career and require very serious investigations by very serious people. Or it can also be weaponized as a means of silencing of political opponents.

Sex crimes are very serious in the Western world. The Muslim world has a much more "boys will be boys" view of the whole thing.

Many IRL Muslim countries are not forgiving to convicted rapists.
It may not be a deterrent if there is a lack of evidence but the intention is still to punish actual rapists.
Taking unproven accusations seriously does not mention the level of hatred for the actual crime.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

If you can't enforce laws because of <insert reason here> then it's not much of a law, or a deterrent to doing the crime anyway, because the chance of actually being killed (or rather, punished) for it is extremely low. And so rape is relatively common in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Indian Kashmir. And rapists can even be rewarded for it even if they are caught. This applies doubly so for shotacons in Afghan infantry and police platoons, which are often kept as barracks bunnies in sexual slavery, but we've had this conversation before.

It's probably entirely possible for a Muslim society to enforce anti-rape laws, but it would require a form of Islam which is very different from any IRL school of thought, because most of the IRL ones tend to require obnoxious things like four male witnesses, and the general cultural climate is one that is very forgiving to rapists in general, despite lip service to the contrary. If it weren't so forgiving, it would be more like a Western society, where the mere accusation of rape (or any sexual crime), decades after the fact, can end a career and require very serious investigations by very serious people. Or it can also be weaponized as a means of silencing of political opponents.

Sex crimes are very serious in the Western world. The Muslim world has a much more "boys will be boys" view of the whole thing.

Name where the Qur'an has a "boys will be boys" approach to proven rapists?

If a country executes drug traffickers or murderers (with large public support for this) is it a "forgiving climate" to these cases?

"different from any IRL school of thought"
many Maliki scholars believed it to be worse than Zinah and a capital offence. A number of real-life Islamic scholars believe 4 witnesses are not required in real life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_I ... y_for_rape.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

If you can't enforce laws because of <insert reason here> then it's not much of a law, or a deterrent to doing the crime anyway, because the chance of actually being killed (or rather, punished) for it is extremely low. And so rape is relatively common in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Indian Kashmir. And rapists can even be rewarded for it even if they are caught. This applies doubly so for shotacons in Afghan infantry and police platoons, which are often kept as barracks bunnies in sexual slavery, but we've had this conversation before.

It's probably entirely possible for a Muslim society to enforce anti-rape laws, but it would require a form of Islam which is very different from any IRL school of thought, because most of the IRL ones tend to require obnoxious things like four male witnesses, and the general cultural climate is one that is very forgiving to rapists in general, despite lip service to the contrary. If it weren't so forgiving, it would be more like a Western society, where the mere accusation of rape (or any sexual crime), decades after the fact, can end a career and require very serious investigations by very serious people. Or it can also be weaponized as a means of silencing of political opponents.

Sex crimes are very serious in the Western world. The Muslim world has a much more "boys will be boys" view of the whole thing.

Name where the Qur'an has a "boys will be boys" approach to proven rapists?

If a country executes drug traffickers or murderers (with large public support for this) is it a "forgiving climate" to these cases?

"different from any IRL school of thought"
many Maliki scholars believed it to be worse than Zinah and a capital offence. A number of real-life Islamic scholars believe 4 witnesses are not required in real life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_I ... y_for_rape.

Most of the countries that execute rapists are Muslim countries

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

What if your country controlled its entirely out of control libido?

But that is the opposite of fun. Better to go all Purpelia on it and just do it.

I will go somewhere in between Austria-Bohemia-Hungary and Purpelia.

Strict (in some areas) but extremely hypocritical and loophole-filled rules are a defining characteristic of the Sharifistani way.

[Dayganistan]

The "rape in Muslim countries" discussion isn't infantry related. Take that shit elsewhere.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Does paying the average infantry NCO enough money to comfortably support 2 wives make sense?

What about paying the average Private enough to support a "pet siren"?

[Gallia-]

If a country executes drug traffickers or murderers (with large public support for this) is it a "forgiving climate" to these cases?

The ratio of rapes prosecuted to rapes committed in Afghanistan/Pakistan/Iraq/whatever is extremely low. It's probably low the world over, but it would be especially low in Afghanistan (as well as India, Pakistan, etc.).

This is the only thing that matters. I somehow doubt the number of rapes committed in Afghanistan was only ~150 in 2012 (this would put it lower than Japan) but you can disagree with that, I guess. The reality is something more akin to "rape isn't prosecuted because it's very hard to achieve a successful prosecution, pretty much anyone responsible for prosecution is doing the rapes, and rapists are typically "punished" by being forced to marry their victims," so it's not very effective really. It probably has one of the higher rape rates in the world per capita, it's just poorly documented and hard to estimate due to the fairly high prevalence and poor measurement validity. It's very hard to believe a society which institutionalizes child rape and retains "marry-your-rapist" cultures would seriously be capable of combating criminal rape as far more likely it's brushed under the rug, ignored, or outright tolerated.

As it turns out, the last one is probably the most likely outcome.

Does paying the average infantry NCO enough money to comfortably support 2 wives make sense?

Why does he need two wives?

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

If a country executes drug traffickers or murderers (with large public support for this) is it a "forgiving climate" to these cases?

The ratio of rapes prosecuted to rapes committed in Afghanistan/Pakistan/Iraq/whatever is extremely low. It's probably low the world over, but it would be especially low in Afghanistan (as well as India, Pakistan, etc.).

This is the only thing that matters. I somehow doubt the number of rapes committed in Afghanistan was only ~150 in 2012 (this would put it lower than Japan) but you can disagree with that, I guess. The reality is something more akin to "rape isn't prosecuted because it's very hard to achieve a successful prosecution, pretty much anyone responsible for prosecution is doing the rapes, and rapists are typically "punished" by being forced to marry their victims," so it's not very effective really. It probably has one of the higher rape rates in the world per capita, it's just poorly documented and hard to estimate due to the fairly high prevalence and poor measurement validity. It's very hard to believe a society which institutionalizes child rape and retains "marry-your-rapist" cultures would seriously be capable of combating criminal rape as far more likely it's brushed under the rug, ignored, or outright tolerated.

As it turns out, the last one is probably the most likely outcome.

Does paying the average infantry NCO enough money to comfortably support 2 wives make sense?

Why does he need two wives?

1. Why would a society that supports a lower age of marriage than you do (and 1 year younger than the age I would support) make them pro-rape?
They probably believe that girls are "old enough to consent" at 15.

2. He wants 2 wives because he loves 2 women.

[Spirit of Hope]

The ratio of rapes prosecuted to rapes committed in Afghanistan/Pakistan/Iraq/whatever is extremely low. It's probably low the world over, but it would be especially low in Afghanistan (as well as India, Pakistan, etc.).

This is the only thing that matters. I somehow doubt the number of rapes committed in Afghanistan was only ~150 in 2012 (this would put it lower than Japan) but you can disagree with that, I guess. The reality is something more akin to "rape isn't prosecuted because it's very hard to achieve a successful prosecution, pretty much anyone responsible for prosecution is doing the rapes, and rapists are typically "punished" by being forced to marry their victims," so it's not very effective really. It probably has one of the higher rape rates in the world per capita, it's just poorly documented and hard to estimate due to the fairly high prevalence and poor measurement validity. It's very hard to believe a society which institutionalizes child rape and retains "marry-your-rapist" cultures would seriously be capable of combating criminal rape as far more likely it's brushed under the rug, ignored, or outright tolerated.

As it turns out, the last one is probably the most likely outcome.



Why does he need two wives?

1. Why would a society that supports a lower age of marriage than you do (and 1 year younger than the age I would support) make them pro-rape?
They probably believe that girls are "old enough to consent" at 15.

2. He wants 2 wives because he loves 2 women.

1. He isn't talking about lower marriage ages, he is talking about the well documented practice of government officials raping young boys.

2. Paying someone extra if they get married is going to encourage them to get married, paying them more per wife is going to encourage them getting married more. Since that is basically what the us armed forces does, you can look to the high divorce rates to get an idea of the issue.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

1. Why would a society that supports a lower age of marriage than you do (and 1 year younger than the age I would support) make them pro-rape?
They probably believe that girls are "old enough to consent" at 15.

2. He wants 2 wives because he loves 2 women.

1. He isn't talking about lower marriage ages, he is talking about the well documented practice of government officials raping young boys.

2. Paying someone extra if they get married is going to encourage them to get married, paying them more per wife is going to encourage them getting married more. Since that is basically what the us armed forces does, you can look to the high divorce rates to get an idea of the issue.

2. What if the ammount they spend on their wife slightly outweighs the extra pay?

[Gallia-]

1)



2) That's what a mistress is for.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

1)

(Image)

2) That's what a mistress is for.

2. Not if he wants to protect her honour. I meant love as in not just the physical connection.
He would have mistress if he didn't love that woman he just wanted her to have sex with him (and only him)

[Spirit of Hope]

1. He isn't talking about lower marriage ages, he is talking about the well documented practice of government officials raping young boys.

2. Paying someone extra if they get married is going to encourage them to get married, paying them more per wife is going to encourage them getting married more. Since that is basically what the us armed forces does, you can look to the high divorce rates to get an idea of the issue.

2. What if the ammount they spend on their wife slightly outweighs the extra pay?

Doesn't matter, paying more for a behavior encourages that behavior. Plus how are you going to define how much someone is paying to support their wives?

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

2. What if the ammount they spend on their wife slightly outweighs the extra pay?

Doesn't matter, paying more for a behavior encourages that behavior. Plus how are you going to define how much someone is paying to support their wives?

1. Why does it encourage the behaviour of the expenditure is more?

2. Culture. in Sharifistan people are excepted to spend as much on each wife as they spend on themselves.

[Spirit of Hope]

Doesn't matter, paying more for a behavior encourages that behavior. Plus how are you going to define how much someone is paying to support their wives?

1. Why does it encourage the behaviour of the expenditure is more?

2. Culture. in Sharifistan people are excepted to spend as much on each wife as they spend on themselves.

Economics 101, the more you pay for a behavior the more you encourage it. The reverse is also true, the more you make people pay for something the more you discourage it. The obvious reality is that this isn't linear, and cultural, legal, religious, and other factors all play a part.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

1. Why does it encourage the behaviour of the expenditure is more?

2. Culture. in Sharifistan people are excepted to spend as much on each wife as they spend on themselves.

Economics 101, the more you pay for a behavior the more you encourage it. The reverse is also true, the more you make people pay for something the more you discourage it. The obvious reality is that this isn't linear, and cultural, legal, religious, and other factors all play a part.

Economics 101:
revenue must exceed expenditure to constitute profit.

Most Sharifistani NCOs are smart. They wouldn't do something for payment that they would lose due to the same thing.
That's a profit of 0%
Or in Sharifistan's case a profit of -2%

[Spirit of Hope]

Economics 101, the more you pay for a behavior the more you encourage it. The reverse is also true, the more you make people pay for something the more you discourage it. The obvious reality is that this isn't linear, and cultural, legal, religious, and other factors all play a part.

Economics 101:
revenue must exceed expenditure to constitute profit.

Most Sharifistani NCOs are smart. They wouldn't do something for payment that they would lose due to the same thing.
That's a profit of 0%
Or in Sharifistan's case a profit of -2%

A marriage isn't a business, I would think that is fairly obvious. If you offer a people money if they does X, you are going to get more people trying to do X. Doesn't matter if X is marriage or something else. Your NCO's may be smart, but they aren't going to beat human nature.

I mean what you are saying above implies that your NCO's simply won't get married without any form of payment, since that means they are just taking a lose without any profit. Which is obviously ridiculous.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Economics 101:
revenue must exceed expenditure to constitute profit.

Most Sharifistani NCOs are smart. They wouldn't do something for payment that they would lose due to the same thing.
That's a profit of 0%
Or in Sharifistan's case a profit of -2%

A marriage isn't a business, I would think that is fairly obvious. If you offer a people money if they does X, you are going to get more people trying to do X. Doesn't matter if X is marriage or something else. Your NCO's may be smart, but they aren't going to beat human nature.

I mean what you are saying above implies that your NCO's simply won't get married without any form of payment, since that means they are just taking a lose without any profit. Which is obviously ridiculous.

No what I mean is why would money be the incentive if it costs more money?

Why would pay someone incentive someone to do something if it also leads to them spending more money?
on the money side of things it's back to square one

I agree a marriage isn't a business.
The Sharifistani soldiers are motivated in their marriage by a desire for emotional connection and also physical satisfaction and, of course, the desire to have a family.

Why would being paid money motivate someone to do something which costs them more money than the extra they're paid? I genuinely don't get that.

[Spirit of Hope]

A marriage isn't a business, I would think that is fairly obvious. If you offer a people money if they does X, you are going to get more people trying to do X. Doesn't matter if X is marriage or something else. Your NCO's may be smart, but they aren't going to beat human nature.

I mean what you are saying above implies that your NCO's simply won't get married without any form of payment, since that means they are just taking a lose without any profit. Which is obviously ridiculous.

No what I mean is why would money be the incentive if it costs more money?

Why would pay someone incentive someone to do something if it also leads to them spending more money?
on the money side of things it's back to square one

I agree a marriage isn't a business.
The Sharifistani soldiers are motivated in their marriage by a desire for emotional connection and also physical satisfaction and, of course, the desire to have a family.

Why would being paid money motivate someone to do something which costs them more money than the extra they're paid? I genuinely don't get that.

People aren't only doing X only because they are getting money to do it, but getting money in addition to all of the other reasons they would do X encourages them to do X more. That is what I am saying.

No your soldiers aren't only going to get married just for the money, they are getting married out of a "desire for emotional connection and also physical satisfaction and, of course, the desire to have a family." Getting paid more if they do get married is a bonus, and is going to encourage them to get married more.

Imagine a soldier on the fence about getting married, is this woman right for me, do I want a family, etc. Do you think he is more or less likely to get married if he finds out that in addition to all the other things he is also going to get more money?

If you want to understand economics better I would suggest reading some books about it. Naked Economics is a pretty good intro and is a fun read.