With all due respect, if I am going to significantly change my behavior or lifestyle, I want evidence for making the change, not ‘‘common sense’’ or ''prevailing wisdom." I have good reason for that, because as a general rule, when we research things, we find out that ‘‘prevailing wisdom’’ is usually bullshit. People are horrible at making generalizations based on the things they experience and their ability to perceive reality is almost always distorted. I’m particularly suspicious of ‘‘prevailing wisdom’’ that is conveniently grounded in old-fashioned notions about how women should behave. I’m not sure why the Straight Dope should be about fighting ignorance or following the evidence, except in this case.
This is mostly right, but I’ll try and expand on this – let’s say a woman, on a dare, or on a whim, or for some other reason, takes off all her clothes and runs through the streets at night. If she gets arrested for indecent exposure (or something similar), she is responsible for it – the consequences (which might be a fine and probation, or something like that) are mostly equal and appropriate as compared to the transgression. If she gets raped, she’s not responsible for it – only the rapist is. She might have made a very minor transgression – against society (very minor indeed!) and against wise behavior – but rape compared to running naked is as far from equal and appropriate as nuclear annihilation is for a trade violation.
So don’t run naked through the streets at night. If you get arrested for it, that’s on you. But if you get raped, that’s never on you – rape is never a mostly equal and appropriate punishment for any transgression (even another rape, in my view).
True. But the frustrating thing is, back when I was willing to fight the good fight (like some here are doing, but undoubtedly more eloquently), it really did no good on this particular subject. Why? Because it’s been overrun with the lying bullshit we’ve seen over all these threads recently. sven addressed it best by her, what, 30 some odd reasons now why these women can’t be trusted. And the same usual suspects with their immoral paper towel tube logic and beliefs suck in antiquity when women knew their place and how to take a punch for their own good, refuse to understand happily.
So, now I’ve let my frustrations get out at the people who are lower than shit on my shoe. I mean, someone must’ve made a crack about me (or another Doper slugging it out in here? I dunno…) not being purty enough to have any problems, right? And I could’ve cracked back (if I’d taken them off ignore to read for myself), the low hanging fruit about how they’ve probably never even touched a woman except for good ol’ ma. But if I’m gonna be all shrieky and pissed off, I’d rather not be so stupid as to bitch about anything other than the fucked up shit they post on these boards. They’re reprehensible apologensia is enough without me being lame. I’ll leave that to others.
Glad though that you’ve found a better way to deal. I suppose if it gets to the point that I can no longer make heads nor tails of a thread due to all the gaps, I will also be another one who finds somewhere else where such blatant misogyny dressed up as intelligence isn’t allowed to run amok. We’ll see.
On that note, I’m out of this thread. It’d be more productive teaching my dog to read.
Well you can do whatever you want in your personal life and no one can tell you what to do. But if we’re just kicking the subject around in a thread, I don’t think your mere declaration that you haven’t seen any evidence backing up what’s widely thought to be true and backed by common sense carries any weight. Especially as it’s not as if you’re declaring that it’s false either - just that you don’t know of any evidence. Not much in that, IMO.
So it seems like you’re backing off what you wrote earlier.
FTR, I was basing my understanding of iiandyiiii’s position on his response to robert_columbia in post #374. In that post, he repeatedly responded to the various comparisons to other instances of victims being “responsible” by emphasizing the term “moral responsibility”. (None of what he’s writing now has anything to do with that issue.)
You’ve got it exactly backwards. I decline to accept the accusatory statements of women against Cosby because they are nothing more substantial than accusatory statements. I don’t think that’s enough. I’m not convinced. This has nothing to do with how much or whether I trust the women involved or what I think of their character. It simply has to do with me needing more concrete evidence to accept such an allegation. It’s really that simple.
Shoutouts to Starving Artist for making what is quite possibly the most disgusting, hateful post on the entire fucking forum. Congratulations. Collect your trophy, take your bows, and get the fuck out.
This is at least the second comment calling out that remark, and I don’t get it. It seems rather tame to me, both by comparison to the general tenor of posts to the Pit, and by comparison to posts that the target of that insult has made in this very thread (& directed at SA himself).
FTR, even it were a harsh remark, FF has no kick coming, because if you’re going to be an over-the-top jerk then some blowback is par for the course. But I don’t see even that. So he said she’s very ugly. This is what breaks the internet?
It’s far more than just a mild insult. “You’re too ugly to be raped” is a common way of silencing or marginalizing a woman who is speaking out. It Has historically been a handy weapon in the arsenal of a misogynist ascendancy. A woman’s only value in a male chauvinist society is her beauty (or generally her sexual appeal to men) and if she is ugly she has no value. It’s an exercise of the patriarchal power (by a man or s woman) over a woman with an opinion for nothing more than being a woman.
Yeah, what Ascenray said. It’s not just “you’re ugly”. It’s “the reason men aren’t raping you is because you’re ugly”. That’s so phenomenally fucked-up I don’t even know what to say.
Well in that case I get it but just disagree with it.
Again, if you can’t deal with being called ugly, with whatever supposed patriarchal connotations are being read into it, then you need to zip it yourself.
Not sure what that has to do with trolling, but in any case you’re definitely misstating what I said.
As though it weren’t obvious from just reading what I wrote, in addition you ought to know this is a misstatement from the fact that I subsequently stated that you yourself haven’t given me any particular reason to think you’re a rapist*, yet you certainly would defend the idea of innocent until proven guilty, correct?
If I had a dollar every time you brought this up, I’d have a couple of hundred dollars by now. So why don’t you just shut the fuck up already about it, we get it you’re on misogyny patrol. Destroying misogyny by ignoring one poster at a time. You go girl.
p.s. Don’t forget to add me, but I’m sure you did some time ago.
She’s the one who by your wacko interpretation implied that if not for their ability to control themselves they might be raping her. I merely pointed out that she might be presumptious in thinking control was even necessary.
Now, to leave the realm of your idiotic interpretations, I merely took a swipe at her in return for the numerous unprovoked insults she’s been throwing my way. Save your silly histrionics for someone who might swallow them.
You’ve got it exactly backwards. I decline to accept the accusatory statements of women against Cosby because they are nothing more substantial than accusatory statements. I don’t think that’s enough. I’m not convinced. This has nothing to do with how much or whether I trust the women involved or what I think of their character. It simply has to do with me needing more concrete evidence to accept such an allegation. It’s really that simple.
So as long as there is only one eyewitness to a heinous crime, you would not only not convict, but you wouldn’t accept it as an allegation? You would be fine sitting down to dinner with Dr. Cosby and his wife and pretend these allegations have never happened. It wouldn’t rise to your level of concern.
