It’s no good trying to teach someone a language they refuse to learn. You’ll note that I wasn’t addressing you, and may draw the appropriate conclusion.
You’re not addressing me either but I’d love to hear a response from you (given your profession) with regards to this point:
I can’t imagine a situation in which the hypothetical (by Max_S that set off this multi-thread discussion) would ever “justify” rape. It’s entirely repugnant to me. But the discussion of it as a hypothetical for those interested in considering it is not offensive to me. It’s not exactly interesting either. Personally, I would have no trouble avoiding taking part and even thinking that it’s problematic for multiple reasons. I just hesitate taking the position it should be prohibited, despite acknowledging the fact that some may find it offensive.
Always interesting how the intellectuals who want to discuss when rape is justified seem to argue only in general terms. Please, do share what you find so fascinating about justifications for rape. What great understanding and mind expansion are you anticipating under the “justified rape” topic? What minds are you hoping will be changed? I invite SeniorBeef to do the same.
It’s not enough to say “well, someone may find it interesting.” You have to weigh that against the harm as well.
You might not be offended by the existence of the thread, but many people on this board are. I am one of them. I think the mere presence of such a thread makes this an unwelcoming place to the people I’d like to have around here. For people who have experienced sexual assault, knowing that this board believes it’s a valid topic for discussion is deeply disturbing. You don’t have to understand this, but please at least accept that many people feel this way, and you can’t “logic” people out of this opinion.
So given that many people will be harmed by such a thread, and so far Max_S is the only poster willing to admit that he actually would be interested in the specific conversation of when it’s OK to rape someone, it is entirely reasonable to decide that the harm of allowing it outweighs the harm of prohibiting it.
Wait, what? I started ignoring Beef’s walls’o’text around the new year. Sounds like he’s an even bigger jackass than I thought!
I’ve stayed out of this discussion, but have been watching everything play out.
@Max_S , I don’t think you were trolling, and I like you as a poster, and I’d hate to see you leave the board because of this situation.
I think you were remarkably tone deaf with that thread, and your justification of it when you disputed your warning. We all have our blind spots, on here and in real life. Just consider it a teachable moment.
I quote Billy Joel:
If I see it as experience, it hasn’t gone to waste.
Sure. You’re a bigot and a bully who’s prejudiced against the disabled.
“Offensive” is a light word to use, and I’ve been saying “bothered” to avoid the right-wing knee-jerk sneers that attach to “offensive.”
Here’s the thing: I don’t have a visceral reaction to threads like that. I’ve hardly ever been sexually assaulted, and I’m just about never worried about it. It doesn’t ping my stress meter in the way that, say, images of needles going into arms does.
But I don’t have to have a visceral reaction to something to understand that others do, and to take that into account.
I ask my dad and his wife – a doctor and nurse, respectively – not to tell stories about injections gone wrong while I’m around, because it really skeeves me out, instills a low-level panic in me. At first they ignored me, until I realized I had to get up and leave the room mid-conversation when they did this. Finally it was disruptive enough that they took the hint. And these are people who love me and are family.
Here? When people have a visceral reaction to something, they can’t rely on the interlocutors to love them and have their best interests at heart. They can’t rely on folks taking it into account. That’s why we have mods.
You don’t need to have that same reaction to rape threads. I don’t have that same reaction to rape threads. But because I do, I don’t freaking start intellectual hypothetical rape debates.
If you (impersonal you, not Quicksilver) really want to, I suggest you find some place where folks won’t have such strong visceral reactions to them. Or at least some place where the mods will let you get away with being kind of shitty to some of the other posters.
(I notice you never did quote me insulting Senorbeef, you liar!)
And you were wrong. Good lord, that thread was fucking disgusting.
Too disgusting to joke about, a rarity.
But that is not the equivalent of what is happening here. You are demanding that a group of people never discusses injections at all. Not that they avoid doing it in front of you, or warn you so you can leave the room, but they that must not ever talk about it between themselves either, because it bothers you so much.
? Did you ask?
It was here:
You didn’t say his words sounded bad, or might give the wrong impression; you said it was betraying his fundamental attitude, and that it is really disgusting. That is clearly an insult.
If this is the lesson, don’t discuss justifications of rape or ask people if rape is justified, by all means I’ve learned it. Before the ATMB topic, before even my original topic was closed, it was clear to me from the in-thread backlash that it wasn’t worth it. I instantly regretted starting that topic, after seeing how much harm came out of it. I can be pretty dense sometimes, but at least I understand that much. And as if the coffin wasn’t already ten feet under, I foolishly overlooked the genetic consequences of inbreeding - it wasn’t even a solid hypothetical for the discussion I wanted to have.
I didn’t dispute any of this in ATMB. I did not dispute closing the topic, and I wrote somewhere I probably would have asked for it to be closed myself if I had time. My concern in ATMB was less about whether that particular discussion is a good thing for these boards, and more about whether I deserved the warning/suspension for misogyny and being too offensive (it was later clarified the warning was for trolling and being a jerk). On that front, I haven’t repented.
ETA: Gadzooks! I won’t be starting another rape debate any time soon.
~Max
I hesitate to wade in, but I don’t know where the idea comes from that every topic must be open to discussion. Why? It seems like an argument for the necessity of an abstract absolutism. In what community setting is every topic acceptable?
I second this request.
I also want a pony, but expect to be disappointed.
This.
There’s some universe of platonic ideals where this is the case.
But in this universe, i.e. the real world, the ‘marketplace of ideas’ is full of snake oil and clunkers being sold as premium, still in the original shrink wrap top tier goods.
The SDMB is a raucous, wildly entertaining house party that has kept users coming back for 22 years – “like caramel-covered crack,” as one user once put it. People participate not out of civic duty, but because it’s fun. Part of what makes it fun is the arguments, which anyone can start on any subject. The SDMB offers a soapbox and an audience that routinely numbers in the thousands and occasionally in the millions. How many minds are changed as a result of these freewheeling symposia I have no idea. But surely there’s value in having to defend your views in open debate, and in having cherished beliefs challenged.
Or go and read @SenorBeef’s posts in the ABTM thread:
I know you have trouble understanding what you read, but my request was to explain what’s interesting about rape. Neither you nor SB have managed that.