Dozer's Fixation on Rape!

[musterion]

No.
He was only sentenced to be in jail for his crime.
He was not sentenced to be raped in jail for his crime.

The crime of him being raped while in jail is a totally separate crime that has nothing to do with his crime he was placed in jail for.

If the jailbird rapist that raped him in jail is brought up on charges of rape, the blame of that crime is completely on the rapist, not him.

Okay.

 

[Tambora]

Alright, this needs to be said. To those of you who are telling me "You are missing Dozer's point, that everyone is responsible for their own actions." If that was his sole point, he would get no arguments out of me, none. I think this is a given that we can all agree with.

My objection comes in the form of his other, intentionally provocative statements that he uses to try to push his argument one step further. Comments like this:



and this...



and this...



and this...



and this...



Etc,etc,etc.

These comments in collaboration paint a very malicious, victim shaming picture that I, personally, object to. If you still think his argument is valid, that's fine. But it is also important to understand why people might lash back at you for doing so.

I know!
I'm not sure he could paint it any clearer!!!!!

And STILL, we have folks defending him and saying "He didn't really mean that".

If we can't go by what people say, what can we go on?

 

[Granite]

I know!
I'm not sure he could paint it any clearer!!!!!

And STILL, we have folks defending him and saying "He didn't really mean that".

If we can't go by what people say, what can we go on?

He already is protected by the mods, he doesn't need anyone else running interference for him.

 

[Rusha]

Alright, this needs to be said. To those of you who are telling me "You are missing Dozer's point, that everyone is responsible for their own actions." If that was his sole point, he would get no arguments out of me, none. I think this is a given that we can all agree with.

My objection comes in the form of his other, intentionally provocative statements that he uses to try to push his argument one step further. Comments like this:

and this...

and this...

and this...

and this...

Etc,etc,etc.

These comments in collaboration paint a very malicious, victim shaming picture that I, personally, object to. If you still think his argument is valid, that's fine. But it is also important to understand why people might lash back at you for doing so.

THAT is just it ... and for people to pretend they don't see it makes it easy to dismiss their claims in their entirety.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Alright, this needs to be said. To those of you who are telling me "You are missing Dozer's point, that everyone is responsible for their own actions." If that was his sole point, he would get no arguments out of me, none. I think this is a given that we can all agree with.

My objection comes in the form of his other, intentionally provocative statements that he uses to try to push his argument one step further. Comments like this:



and this...



and this...



and this...



and this...



Etc,etc,etc.

These comments in collaboration paint a very malicious, victim shaming picture that I, personally, object to. If you still think his argument is valid, that's fine. But it is also important to understand why people might lash back at you for doing so.

He is teetering on the line here because he is trying to make an academic argument. If you ask him point blank if any woman deserves to be raped, he will say no. He is careless in his wording. For someone to use poor wording so often, it could mean he does have some unconscious feelings about particular behavior of some women. Subconsciously, he may think whorish behavior is so particularly evil, rape is justified. This could stem from not knowing just what a horror rape is. His "horrific" thread adds weight to this idea.

 

[Quetzal]

He is teetering on the line here because he is trying to make an academic argument.

I do not think you sincerely believe that. In order to make an academic argument you first need to clearly define your argument. In order to make an academic argument you need evidence. In order to make an academic argument you have to present your research and findings. Since he has done none of those things, this is not an academic argument. Period.

 

[glorydaz]

I am not thinking he means it the way you take it. I understand his overall point. Some people wrongly use words like 'punishment' or 'deserve' wrongly when there is some irresponsibly on a persons part that deliberately put them in harms way.

Like saying "what an idiot to leave their car running with the keys in the ignition, unlocked, they deserve to have their car stolen because of their own stupidity"

Or like saying "well what did he think would happen after he called joe blows wife a hog, he should take his 'punishment' like a man (after being beaten half to death for insulting another mans wife).

I think we've all been guilty of using those terms flippantly and improperly.The overall sentiment is not that they caused the crime, or that the one who acted in crime is any less guilty for what they chose to do, but that the victim has suffered as a result of their own foolish behavior. (which still doesnt lessen the guilt/responsibility on the part of the one who committed the crime in any way)

Hes even said as such outright, which is ignored.

He is also using specific examples for the context of what he is saying.

I agree its a bad choice of words though, because those words imply that the victim earned or wanted something to happen or is being given something they caused, when thats not the case.

There ya go. Unfortunately, on this subject and certainly on this thread, the victim defenders will not allow any kind of normal language. It's all about being politically correct. It's tiring having to tiptoe through the tulips....it's impossible to make it through without stepping on someone's sensitive feelings.

 

[glorydaz]

I do not think you sincerely believe that. In order to make an academic argument you first need to clearly define your argument. In order to make an academic argument you need evidence. In order to make an academic argument you have to present your research and findings. Since he has done none of those things, this is not an academic argument. Period.

It's more simple than that. It's a COMMON SENSE ARGUMENT.

 

[musterion]

He already is protected by the mods, he doesn't need anyone else running interference for him.

 

[bybee]

There ya go. Unfortunately, on this subject and certainly on this thread, the victim defenders will not allow any kind of normal language. It's all about being politically correct. It's tiring having to tiptoe through the tulips....it's impossible to make it through without stepping on someone's sensitive feelings.

Well you must be well rested?

 

[musterion]

Really only one way to settle this. Calls for a new thread.

 

[Quetzal]

There ya go. Unfortunately, on this subject and certainly on this thread, the victim defenders...

I was going to let this go, but let's talk about your choice of wording here. Victim defenders... to defend a victim of an injustice, why is that a bad thing to you?

 

[bybee]

I was going to let this go, but let's talk about your choice of wording here. Victim defenders... to defend a victim of an injustice, why is that a bad thing to you?

Good question. Why would one not defend a victim?

 

[Rusha]

I do not think you sincerely believe that. In order to make an academic argument you first need to clearly define your argument. In order to make an academic argument you need evidence. In order to make an academic argument you have to present your research and findings. Since he has done none of those things, this is not an academic argument. Period.

Well, I am going to go out on a limb here and state that his only intention for making this thread, along with his statements, was to get a reaction.

There isn't anything he has ever posted that would indicate he is morally superior ... in fact, quite the opposite, actually.

While he is slamming women on these current threads, it needs to be mentioned that a still married Koban produced this gem:

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3848034&postcount=1

and we're dating
we are Christians
we care deeply for each other
we plan to marry
we plan to build a home
we plan to raise a family

some here seem to feel a great depth of disapproval about it, so i thought i'd throw it out and see what the peanut gallery thinks

how do you feel about the fact that i'm dating a woman who is old enough to be my daughter (granddaughter, actually)?

eta: this is a hypothetical, based on my life situation and my plans for the future

I expect people who use derogatory names towards other people to be above reproach.

Hypocritical much ...

 

[ClimateSanity]

I do not think you sincerely believe that. In order to make an academic argument you first need to clearly define your argument. In order to make an academic argument you need evidence. In order to make an academic argument you have to present your research and findings. Since he has done none of those things, this is not an academic argument. Period.

I said he was trying to make an academic argument; not that he actually made one. I do believe he cited statistics and showed a graph. That was an attempt to bring evidence in. He is working on this in college. He is bringing in what he gleaned from his studies. He is also making this philosophical which genuine original did as well. The main point he is making is that women put themselves into unfortunate situations that they should have known better and should accept responsibility for making poor choices.

 

[Granite]

I said he was trying to make an academic argument; not that he actually made one. I do believe he cited statistics and showed a graph. That was an attempt to bring evidence in. He is working on this in college. He is bringing in what he gleaned from his studies. He is also making this philosophical which genuine original did as well. The main point he is making is that women put themselves into unfortunate situations that they should have known better and should accept responsibility for making poor choices.

Yeah, we know: the same victim blaming arguments that've been made before. Nothing new or fresh here at all.

 

[glorydaz]

I believe that is a faulty line of reasoning.

You're wrong.

When we are discussing the way people reason with different things, it isn't always right/wrong. Just different.

Oh really? Then why did you use the word "faulty", which is closer to my word "wrong", than it is to your other word "different"? :think:

 

[Quetzal]

I said he was trying to make an academic argument; not that he actually made one. I do believe he cited statistics and showed a graph. That was an attempt to bring evidence in. He is working on this in college. He is bringing in what he gleaned from his studies. He is also making this philosophical which genuine original did as well. The main point he is making is that women put themselves into unfortunate situations that they should have known better and should accept responsibility for making poor choices.

It is my opinion that you are championing the wrong person, but do whatever you want with your time.

 

[Quetzal]

Oh really? Then why did you use the word "faulty", which is closer to my word "wrong", than it is to your other word "different"? :think:

One word suggests that adjustment/corrections can be made. The other is a concrete declaration.

 

[glorydaz]

Your own words condemn you. I wish it were not so.

Don't tell me. You learned that from God's untruth. Didn't ya? Maybe LA? Come on....fess up, Bybee.


I'll respond to your words exactly like I do to her nonsense. :rotfl: