# Starving Artist - we remember you **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 3, 2014, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204 "2014-12-03T04:53:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 33
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/641 "2014-12-19T08:38:11Z")
Okay. Mea culpa on **LavenderBlue’s** grandfather/brother/father. I originally read her post on my phone while out Christmas shopping and misunderstood some of the context. The error is mine and it does appear that it was indeed her husband who had to sign for her. Since I have first hand knowledge of several female relatives who had their own checking accounts and in a couple of instances owned income producing properties, I still suspect that bounced checks or a poor credit history might explain the necessity of the husband’s signature, and the fact that she might legally have still been a minor could be the reason too. The one thing I know for sure is that women could, if they wanted to and had income of their own, open checking accounts in the 50s and 60s. ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/642 "2014-12-19T08:39:41Z")
This has got to be the first “I post less than you” challenge… ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/643 "2014-12-19T08:40:32Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > I know you left your computer signed on but you had more important things to do, despite what your posting history reveals… > > Wanna compare posting history to see who’s less invested? I leave my computer signed on all the time so you can’t tell anything by that. The LavenderBlue father thing was gnawing at me though so I went back to investigate and then composed the post I just submitted. And now I’m out. ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/644 "2014-12-19T08:43:25Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > And now I’m out. Seems I have heard that before…recently. Edit: well I guess I read it not heard it… ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 9:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/645 "2014-12-19T09:05:39Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > The fuck, it’s worse. > > Mere accusation worse than actual assault? You really are just a worthless arse-wen, aren’t you? Gaaah!!! The morons!!! They never stop!!! Hell, yes!!! Being falsely accused of rape is a hell of a lot worse than being groped!!! Are you insane? Oh, wait. Let’s calm down and take a rational look at the two. On the one had we have a woman who finds herself the target of an amorous guy who’s getting a little handsy or pushy like the guy in the Doris Day movie that kicked all this off. Maybe he even gets a hand on her boob or bottom. Then she firmly tells him to knock it off and like most men under the circumstances he does. Now let’s look at the guy who gets falsely charged with rape. He gets arrested. He gets booked and has to spend at least some time in a jail cell. He has to post bail if he can come up with it and he loses that money. He has to hire a lawyer and he loses that money. He immediately becomes suspect in the eyes of all his family and friends. He may lose his job, and if not he’ll be working under a cloud of suspicion from then on. He goes to trial and has to pay more attorney fees, and if convicted he goes to prison for a crime he didn’t commit and his family loses his income and probably their home, and his wife loses her husband and his kids lose their dad. So, yeah, I’d sure as hell say a “mere accusation” is a hell of a lot worse than being groped. And I’d say anyone who insists otherwise is out of their frigging mind! ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/646 "2014-12-19T12:30:55Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > And second, you said your grandfather had to sign for your mother to get a checking account. It sounds like perhaps she lived in a state where people under the age of 21 were considered minors and was that why her father had to sign for her to get a checking account? Or did she perhaps have a history of bouncing checks? I’m guessing the problem was one or the other of these, and either she didn’t tell you about it or you intentionally left it out in order to illegitimately put the lie to my claim that women could indeed have their own checking accounts, but even if not it’s hardly a ringing condemnation of 60s sexism that a father had to sign for his twenty year old daughter to get a checking account. As I cited before, banks could legally deny women checking accounts before various banking regulations put into place in the 70s without their husband or father’s permission (or another man to cosign). Not all banks did but many did, and many women could not get a checking account. These are facts that have been cited that you continue to deny. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/647 "2014-12-19T12:33:06Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > The one thing I know for sure is that women could, if they wanted to and had income of their own, open checking accounts in the 50s and 60s. You shouldn’t know this for sure – I cited factually that banks could and often did prevent women from banking services (without a male cosigner), including opening checking accounts, before the 70s regulations. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/648 "2014-12-19T12:35:32Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Gaaah!!! The morons!!! They never stop!!! > > Hell, yes!!! Being falsely accused of rape is a hell of a lot worse than being groped!!! > > Are you insane? > > Oh, wait. Let’s calm down and take a rational look at the two. On the one had we have a woman who finds herself the target of an amorous guy who’s getting a little handsy or pushy like the guy in the Doris Day movie that kicked all this off. Maybe he even gets a hand on her boob or bottom. Then she firmly tells him to knock it off and like most men under the circumstances he does. > > Now let’s look at the guy who gets falsely charged with rape. He gets arrested. He gets booked and has to spend at least some time in a jail cell. He has to post bail if he can come up with it and he loses that money. He has to hire a lawyer and he loses that money. He immediately becomes suspect in the eyes of all his family and friends. He may lose his job, and if not he’ll be working under a cloud of suspicion from then on. He goes to trial and has to pay more attorney fees, and if convicted he goes to prison for a crime he didn’t commit and his family loses his income and probably their home, and his wife loses her husband and his kids lose their dad. > > So, yeah, I’d sure as hell say a “mere accusation” is a hell of a lot worse than being groped. And I’d say anyone who insists otherwise is out of their frigging mind! You’re talking about a whole lot more than a false accusation. Yes, a false conviction of rape would be terrible. But you’ll have to provide a cite if you think more than a tiny, tiny portion of false accusations even go to court, much less end in conviction. On “sexual assault” – language is how we use it. If most people say groping is sexual assault (and I’ve noticed that you just changed your definition from “must include sex” to “groping of the genital area”), then that phrase includes groping. That’s how language works. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/649 "2014-12-19T13:37:46Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > Seems I have heard that before…recently. > > Edit: well I guess I read it not heard it… It was really important that he inform us all that he would be away for 25 minutes. He is so very busy with important stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/650 "2014-12-19T13:49:54Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > I don’t care what Wikipedia says, or what fifty years of liberal brainwashing may have succeeded in convincing people like you to accept, but I came of age during a less rabid time when reason and common sense ruled the day and words had actual meaning rather than being stretched and perverted to ridiculous lengths in service to political correctness. Sexual assault isn’t sexual assault unless it involves, you know, sex. Crazy, huh? And like it or not, unexpected or unwanted kissing or a hand on someone’s butt isn’t sex, and can even be an end unto themselves. So what do you think, **Heffalump and Roo**? **Spice Weasel**? SA contends that forced kissing and groping is not sexual assault. Do you agree? Do you agree that women should COPE with this sort of behavior? [QUOTE=Starving Artist] Anything else? [/QUOTE] Yes. You have violated board rules yet again when you changed my name in quote tags. You twisted, demented fuck. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/651 "2014-12-19T14:03:09Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > And now I’ve got to leave as I have worthwhile stuff to do. For a long time I’ve wondered why you feel it so crucial to constantly announce that you are leaving to do other things. Your posts contain a higher ratio of these announcements than those of any other poster on this board, by orders of magnitude. But now I understand: you’re doing it for our benefit. With most posters, we known when they’re off doing other things because they stop posting for a while. With you, however, there are no such telltale pauses. If not for the artificial lacunae, your words would appear as one endless, unbroken, torrential elephant-stream of liquid stool surging from the floodgates of your deteriorating mind. So thank you. It doesn’t quite work, but the effort is appreciated. ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/652 "2014-12-19T15:14:47Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Okay. Mea culpa on **LavenderBlue’s** grandfather/brother/father. I originally read her post on my phone while out Christmas shopping and misunderstood some of the context. The error is mine and it does appear that it was indeed her husband who had to sign for her. Since I have first hand knowledge of several female relatives who had their own checking accounts and in a couple of instances owned income producing properties, I still suspect that bounced checks or a poor credit history might explain the necessity of the husband’s signature, and the fact that she might legally have still been a minor could be the reason too. The one thing I know for sure is that women could, if they wanted to and had income of their own, open checking accounts in the 50s and 60s. You’re so full of bullshit it is coming out of your ears. My mom did not give me an exact year but implied it was after she married and before she had me. This would put it in the late 1960’s. Since she married at 23 and had me right before her 27th birthday, she was a grown woman at the time with a full time job. She was denied the right to open up a bank account in her own name solely because she was a married woman and seen as a minor by the bank. It was not poor credit history or because she was actually a minor. It was because she was married and the laws of the day did not treat married women as equals to the men they married. My father (her HUSBAND in case you still seem unable to grasp this fact) had to come down to the bank and sign for her. At the tie my dad (her HUSBAND) would not have been required to get her signature if he wanted to open a bank account in his name. This would never happen today. The fact that you want to bring back such days is unreal. My dad was born in 1936. He’s a bit of sexist old coot who has never changed a diaper in his life. The last time I spoke to him a few days ago he repeatedly implied (yet again!) that cleaning was women’s work. At one point he basically stated that he wished I lived closer so that I could “help him out” – and by that he meant I should clean my house and his. When I told him the person who should be cleaning out his house is my lazy 40 year old bro who lives with him rent free, has no children or wife and works at a paid job far fewer hours than he should, dad got all huffy and started to talk about how that was women’s work and therefore something I should be doing instead. And yet my dad still manages to be far less sexist and stupid than you are. Dad is horrified when talks about his wife being assaulted or the fact that he had to sign for her to get a bank account in her own name. He’s also pro-choice and happy to brag about my accomplishments as a published author and the glowing report cards and fierce intelligence of his oldest granddaughter. He talks about my late mom with enormous love and admiration and how pleased he is to see a female doctor for his eye problems and a female lawyer when he had to sign some legal documents a few month ago. You’re probably close to the same age and yet even he has managed to shed at least some of the sexism that shaped him. Why not join him and try it? It’s not that hard I promise. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/653 "2014-12-19T15:37:26Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > My apologies to **Starving Artist** for this slight digression. I saw **Fotheringay-Phipps** make this argument in the Bill Cosby thread but didn’t get a chance to respond then. I don’t want to lose my chance now. > I saw your argument in the Bill Cosby Pit thread and was intrigued. Is there anything besides personal experience that you’re backing your claim on? I’m not doubting you. I’m just really interested in reading more about it. It sounds like an intriguing theory on a first read, but it’s not really fleshed out enough to know if it doesn’t come up against other issues if it was more fully explored. Can you point to any background material that you might have based your theories on? Thanks. Sorry, nothing more than that. And again, I’m not saying it’s a net negative. Only that there’s also a negative aspect. [I should add that in addition to the matter of encouraging an “everyone does it” attitude by claiming that such things are widespread, there’s also a related angle if there’s also an accompanying tightening of standards to the point where there are in fact very widespread trangressions - this too has the effect of encouraging a cynical attitude to the entire set of standards as being something that everyone superficially supports but ignores in practice. Some of the recent “yes means yes” efforts might be reaching that point IMO.] ---
**Author:** ![Spice\_Weasel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spice_weasel/32/5435_2.png) [@Spice\_Weasel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spice_Weasel)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/654 "2014-12-19T17:17:53Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > So what do you think, **Heffalump and Roo**? **Spice Weasel**? SA contends that forced kissing and groping is not sexual assault. Do you agree? > > Do you agree that women should COPE with this sort of behavior? No, I don’t agree, but perhaps more relevantly, neither does the law. Sexual assault (from forced kissing to rape) is a pretty broad spectrum but as far as I can tell it all seems grounded in the same cultural attitudes toward women. And the dismissal of anything on that spectrum speaks to a lack of empathy for others’ experience. Again, it all comes down to the context of any given experience, the history of the person experiencing it, and the immediate circumstances in the aftermath. I have thought about this and can really find no better rule of thumb than trusting the victim’s own assessment of the impact the event has had on her (or his) life. I guess there will always be people who appear to be ‘‘overreacting’’ or ‘‘under reacting’’ but if we truly mean to restore dignity to the victims of sexual assault I don’t know why we can’t just take their fucking word for it when they say they are or are not harmed by a given experience. The attitude that behaviors on the lower end of the spectrum are something that should be tolerated is both wrong and at the same time probably impossible to fight. [QUOTE=FP] Sorry, nothing more than that. And again, I’m not saying it’s a net negative. Only that there’s also a negative aspect. [/QUOTE] [New York Magazine: Awareness is Overrated](http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/07/awareness-is-overrated.html) > [@](#): > > In the most unfortunate cases, raising awareness can have the opposite of its intended effect. The anti-drug campaign is one example, but there are others: In one study famous to social scientists, visitors to Arizona’s Petrified Forest National Park appeared to be more likely to steal petrified wood when presented with information about the high frequency of other park visitors’ pilching, because the information “normalise[d] undesirable conduct,” as the researchers put it — if everyone else is stealing wood, who cares if I take some, too? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/655 "2014-12-19T17:24:37Z")
Thanks, that’s a good link. And interestingly, the paragraph following the one you quoted applies the same point to the topic we’re discussing: > [@](#): > > The authors of an International Rescue Committee literature review on preventing gender-based violence came to a similar conclusion: “Awareness campaigns [about gender-based violence] often propagate a descriptive norm that [violent] behavior is prevalent in the community, perhaps licensing violent behavior rather than activating behavior to reduce GBV,” they wrote. One of the co-authors, Laurie Ball Cooper, told me that the #YesAllWomen campaign could be an example of this. “If your focus is on how common the behavior is, you may actually reduce the likelihood of a bystander stepping in to to stop it, or you may reaffirm the perpetrator’s belief that they can do whatever the undesirable behavior is without repercussion," she said. (Though she also pointed out that the campaign could have important goals beyond behavior change, like giving heretofore silent women a forum for relating what happened to them.) ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/656 "2014-12-19T17:29:19Z")
> [@Spice\_Weasel](#): > > The attitude that behaviors on the lower end of the spectrum are something that should be tolerated is both wrong and at the same time probably impossible to fight. I know that it sometimes feels that way, and maybe it’s true (the intersection of the biology of sex and the biology of aggression may mean that it is never eradicated). I do think that there are dramatic cultural changes that have occurred, though, and I do hope that does make a big difference. As an example, my point in bringing up movies from the 50s was to illustrate that tolerance for terrible behavior has changed. (It’s kind of stunning to look back at, really). ---
**Author:** ![Spice\_Weasel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spice_weasel/32/5435_2.png) [@Spice\_Weasel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spice_Weasel)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/657 "2014-12-19T17:31:07Z")
That article is really full of good stuff, because it not only outlines the problem but offers some solutions, motivational interviewing and establishing social norms being among them. **Sr. Weasel** has done some work with Social and Emotional Learning in schools, as well as the implementation of anti-bullying programs that have been shown to improve school climate so I have a passing familiarity with some of these. It all suggests there is a better approach than ‘‘rape is a serious problem that happens a lot.’’ An alternative might be a campaign driven by men that normalizes consent and respect for women. The emphasis there is not on the undesirable behavior but on the desirable one. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/658 "2014-12-19T19:34:12Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Now let’s look at the guy who gets falsely charged with rape. He gets arrested. Really? So Bill Cosby, whom you believe is falsely accused of rape, was arrested and is sitting in jail right now? No? Or those UVA guys? Then fuck right off with this and the rest of it. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2014, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/659 "2014-12-20T00:27:47Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > So what do you think, **Heffalump and Roo**? **Spice Weasel**? SA contends that forced kissing and groping is not sexual assault. Do you agree? If you’re going to drag me into a discussion that I didn’t choose to participate in by calling me out by name, then at least grow a pair and discuss it with me instead of slinking over to another board to link my posts and mischaracterize them because you’re so butthurt about them, as you did recently. As to your question, in a legal sense in CA, according to the blurb that **askeptic** (while drunk) linked, forced kissing doesn’t fit in the criteria of sexual assault unless those body parts aren’t exhaustive. Groping is too broad a term. It would only be sexual assault if the touching involved those named body parts. In a vernacular sense, it looks like [this wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault) concludes that those two things are sexual assault. At this point, I haven’t thought about the ramifications of that difference, so if you have anything to add besides insult and innuendo, I might be interested. > [@askeptic](#): > > Overview of California Sexual Assault Laws Crimes generally referred to as sexual assault (see also, Sex Crimes) may be prosecuted through California’s sexual battery laws. California’s sexual assault laws (or sexual battery) prohibit unwanted touching of another person’s intimate parts. The California Penal Code defines intimate parts as the victim’s “sexual organ, anus, groin, or buttocks of any person, and the breast of a female.” When sexual assault leads to nonconsensual intercourse with the victim, it is charged as rape (see California Rape Laws for more specific information). - See more at: [http://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-sexual-assault-laws.html#sthash.vWuhwM70.dpuf](http://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-sexual-assault-laws.html#sthash.vWuhwM70.dpuf). > [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Do you agree that women should COPE with this sort of behavior? If you want to specify what you mean by COPE, I can give a better answer. But yes, there’s no other choice than to cope with what happens to anyone. How people choose to cope is the point. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2014, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204/660 "2014-12-20T00:59:37Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Sorry, nothing more than that. Thanks. It’s an interesting concept, but it’s hard to get a handle on. > [@Spice\_Weasel](#): > > [New York Magazine: Awareness is Overrated](http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/07/awareness-is-overrated.html) Thanks! Fascinating article! I’m having a hard time imagining how the theory can be applied to the issue of violence against women in a positive sense. The examples in the other issues are innovative, but they’re not based on a single concept. > [@Spice\_Weasel](#): > > I have thought about this and can really find no better rule of thumb than trusting the victim’s own assessment of the impact the event has had on her (or his) life. I guess there will always be people who appear to be ‘‘overreacting’’ or ‘‘under reacting’’ but if we truly mean to restore dignity to the victims of sexual assault I don’t know why we can’t just take their fucking word for it when they say they are or are not harmed by a given experience. I’m missing the context here. As I noted in my last post, I don’t think the behaviors are considered illegal in some places. When you say “we”, who are you referring to? I think[this article](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/against-universal-responses-to-rape-allegations/383552/) that I linked in the Bill Cosby thread breaks down the “we” into more depth. > [@](#): > > To whom is “we” is referring in her article? > > The presumption seems to be that “we,” as a society, need to collectively adopt a universal standard of credulousness to apply when individual rape allegations are made. > > But that isn’t true. It really isn’t about believing or disbelieving the victim. It’s about what happens to everyone else surrounding the victim. The victim should be believed about how harmed they are by people in the helping professions to help that person’s recovery. But carrying that over to punishing people on the basis of the level of subjective injury of the victim seems problematic to me. If one victim is subjectively harmed to a greater extent than another victim, should one accused be subject to more punishment than another accused based on the victim’s subjective harm? That doesn’t seem fair. The broad brush of “why we can’t just take their fucking word for it” only works for some contexts, IMO. In which context are you applying this? If you’re applying this for all contexts, could you explain how it works. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204.md?page=32) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/starving-artist-we-remember-you/706204.md?page=34)